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

[Moviestar]

Re: Re:

I rated Valverde as 2nd best hilly classic riders of the generation behind Philippe Gilbert.
Philippe Gilbert show us that he is unbeatable when he is on his best form.

Many althletes cannot keep his best form for sickness, life style and training. But Gilbert is the strongest when he was on fire.

Well I rate him 1st, easily...

If you don't take Valverde's grand tour results into account (and gilbert's results in the cobbles for that matter) and focus purely on hilly classics, Gilbert easily has better palmares

OK. Let's do that then:

Gilbert:

1x WCRR
1x Liege + 1 podium
2x Lombardia

3x Amstel
1x Fleche
1x San Sebastian
1x Quebec

2x GP de Wallonie, 2x Gran Piemonte, Strade Bianche, Vuelta a Murcia




Valverde:

6 WCRR podiums
3x Liege + 3 podiums
2 Lombardia podiums

4x Fleche
2x San Sebastian

3x Klasika Primavera, Trofeo Deia, Roma Maxima, GP Indurain, Paris-Camembert



As I see this is pretty equal. But we also must take into consideration the fact that Gilbert rode much more races than Valverde (races of this kind). Gilbert is exclusively one-day racer, Valverde on the other hand is also GT and stage race specialist. For example Valverde never rode any of the Canadian classics and didn't rode Lombardia for 6 consecutive years (2007-2012). So as their hilly classics record is similar, yet Valverde rode much less, I would give him advantage over Gilbert

You forgot to mention one important factor. In that super year of Gilbert, Valverde didn't take part in any of these races. So the palmares of Gilbert gives somehow a distorted view, if you compare his palmares to that of Valverde.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

If you only count the victories, it's clearly Gilbert.
Gilbert also raced other classics, like Omloop, MSR, RVV + races like Eneco that Valverde never contests AND also participates and wins stages in GTs.

1x WCRR
1x Liege
2x Lombardia

3x Amstel
1x Fleche
1x San Sebastian
1x Quebec

2x GP de Wallonie, 2x Gran Piemonte, Strade Bianche, Vuelta a Murcia

vs.

3x Liege

4x Fleche
2x San Sebastian

3x Klasika Primavera, Trofeo Deia, Roma Maxima, GP Indurain, Paris-Camembert

Well you listed 16 wins vs 16 wins, and you say it's clearly Gilbert. Would you explain please?
What the hell Eneco Tour has got to do with this?!
Gilbert wins stages in GT's you say. Well it's 9 vs 14 in Valverde's favor. I missed the point again?

He left out races like Brabantse Pijl (2011, 2014), Paris-Tours (2008, 2009) and Strade Bianche (2011). And the fact is Gilbert has won a greater variety of hilly classics than Valverde, which counts for a lot too. And Gilbert's wins are bigger because of the World Championship.

 

[Flamin]

Physically, Valverde is the better rider in hilly one-day races, but Gilbert has this pure winning instinct that Valverde hasn't. That's one of the main reasons why Gilbert has the better palmares, though Valverde likely missed out on more/better results in them by focusing more on other races as well.

You can make an evenly good case for both, so for me they're equal.

P.S: where did Gilbert become WC? Let's hold a WC in Huy, or Liège, or some random town with a 3-5km @ 8% hill at the end, shall we? Some context would be nice: Gilbert got extremely lucky.

Valverde got 6 medals on all kind of parcours, which is simply amazing. Yes, of course anyone would trade that for one rainbow jersey, but in a discussion about who the better rider (not who has the better palmares!!) is, 1 WC that suits you to perfection doesn't make you better than 6 medals on all sorts of different terrain.

 

[Bardamu]

Re:

Physically, Valverde is the better rider in hilly one-day races, but Gilbert has this pure winning instinct that Valverde hasn't. That's one of the main reasons why Gilbert has the better palmares, though Valverde likely missed out on more/better results in them by focusing more on other races as well.

You can make an evenly good case for both, so for me they're equal.

P.S: where did Gilbert become WC? Let's hold a WC in Huy, or Liège, or some random town with a 3-5km @ 8% hill at the end, shall we? Some context would be nice: Gilbert got extremely lucky.

Valverde got 6 medals on all kind of parcours, which is simply amazing. Yes, of course anyone would trade that for one rainbow jersey, but in a discussion about who the better rider (not who has the better palmares!!) is, 1 WC that suits you to perfection doesn't make you better than 6 medals on all sorts of different terrain.

This.

 

[Bardamu]

Re: Re:

Winning points classification at the Tour (aka green jersey) I rate slightly higher than winning a stage at this same event, and equal as lets say 10th place in the GC. And I'm being generous here, far more than UCI, CQ Rankings or ProCyclingStats. As I said earlier, it's not really a serious competition

Nobody remembers top ten placings unless you won or were on the podium.

I don't think I've seen half the riders in the top ten of this year's Tour even once during the TV broadcast. I don't even know what team Meintjes rides for. The first time I saw Kreuziger was during stage 20. Adam Yates was fourth, but if it wasn't for that freak crash I wouldn't have noticed him once.

I'd easily take the green jersey over a second place at the Tour. Sagan is the rider of this Tour, without a doubt.

I still remember the media attention Boonen got when he won the Green Jersey. Jurgen VDB's fifth place in the Tour pales in comparison.

Could also have something to do with the massive hard-on they have in Flanders for Tommeke and the utterly boring personality of VdB? You shouldn't rate the green jersey higher than it deserves.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

Winning points classification at the Tour (aka green jersey) I rate slightly higher than winning a stage at this same event, and equal as lets say 10th place in the GC. And I'm being generous here, far more than UCI, CQ Rankings or ProCyclingStats. As I said earlier, it's not really a serious competition

Nobody remembers top ten placings unless you won or were on the podium.

I don't think I've seen half the riders in the top ten of this year's Tour even once during the TV broadcast. I don't even know what team Meintjes rides for. The first time I saw Kreuziger was during stage 20. Adam Yates was fourth, but if it wasn't for that freak crash I wouldn't have noticed him once.

I'd easily take the green jersey over a second place at the Tour. Sagan is the rider of this Tour, without a doubt.

I still remember the media attention Boonen got when he won the Green Jersey. Jurgen VDB's fifth place in the Tour pales in comparison.

Could also have something to do with the massive hard-on they have in Flanders for Tommeke and the utterly boring personality of VdB? You shouldn't rate the green jersey higher than it deserves.

You shouldn't rate losing higher than it deserves.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re:

Physically, Valverde is the better rider in hilly one-day races, but Gilbert has this pure winning instinct that Valverde hasn't. That's one of the main reasons why Gilbert has the better palmares, though Valverde likely missed out on more/better results in them by focusing more on other races as well.

You can make an evenly good case for both, so for me they're equal.

P.S: where did Gilbert become WC? Let's hold a WC in Huy, or Liège, or some random town with a 3-5km @ 8% hill at the end, shall we? Some context would be nice: Gilbert got extremely lucky.

Valverde got 6 medals on all kind of parcours, which is simply amazing. Yes, of course anyone would trade that for one rainbow jersey, but in a discussion about who the better rider (not who has the better palmares!!) is, 1 WC that suits you to perfection doesn't make you better than 6 medals on all sorts of different terrain.

What? Valverde has gotten routes that suited him perfectly many times and he managed to lose every single time...

 

[Gigs_98]

Re:

Physically, Valverde is the better rider in hilly one-day races, but Gilbert has this pure winning instinct that Valverde hasn't. That's one of the main reasons why Gilbert has the better palmares, though Valverde likely missed out on more/better results in them by focusing more on other races as well.

You can make an evenly good case for both, so for me they're equal.

P.S: where did Gilbert become WC? Let's hold a WC in Huy, or Liège, or some random town with a 3-5km @ 8% hill at the end, shall we? Some context would be nice: Gilbert got extremely lucky.

Valverde got 6 medals on all kind of parcours, which is simply amazing. Yes, of course anyone would trade that for one rainbow jersey, but in a discussion about who the better rider (not who has the better palmares!!) is, 1 WC that suits you to perfection doesn't make you better than 6 medals on all sorts of different terrain.

But the fact that Gilbert has the better instinct also has to be considered when you ask who is the better rider. Legs aren't everything. And Valverde had many WC which would have suited him perfectly. They maybe didn't finish uphill but 2013 and 2014 were basically perfect for him.

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

Physically, Valverde is the better rider in hilly one-day races, but Gilbert has this pure winning instinct that Valverde hasn't. That's one of the main reasons why Gilbert has the better palmares, though Valverde likely missed out on more/better results in them by focusing more on other races as well.

You can make an evenly good case for both, so for me they're equal.

P.S: where did Gilbert become WC? Let's hold a WC in Huy, or Liège, or some random town with a 3-5km @ 8% hill at the end, shall we? Some context would be nice: Gilbert got extremely lucky.

Valverde got 6 medals on all kind of parcours, which is simply amazing. Yes, of course anyone would trade that for one rainbow jersey, but in a discussion about who the better rider (not who has the better palmares!!) is, 1 WC that suits you to perfection doesn't make you better than 6 medals on all sorts of different terrain.

What? Valverde has gotten routes that suited him perfectly many times and he managed to lose every single time...

Like when?! And what route favored Valverde more than Gilbert?
The fact that he can do good on almost any kind of route except pan-flat can only be testament of his greatness!

 

[Flamin]

Re: Re:

Physically, Valverde is the better rider in hilly one-day races, but Gilbert has this pure winning instinct that Valverde hasn't. That's one of the main reasons why Gilbert has the better palmares, though Valverde likely missed out on more/better results in them by focusing more on other races as well.

You can make an evenly good case for both, so for me they're equal.

P.S: where did Gilbert become WC? Let's hold a WC in Huy, or Liège, or some random town with a 3-5km @ 8% hill at the end, shall we? Some context would be nice: Gilbert got extremely lucky.

Valverde got 6 medals on all kind of parcours, which is simply amazing. Yes, of course anyone would trade that for one rainbow jersey, but in a discussion about who the better rider (not who has the better palmares!!) is, 1 WC that suits you to perfection doesn't make you better than 6 medals on all sorts of different terrain.

But the fact that Gilbert has the better instinct also has to be considered when you ask who is the better rider. Legs aren't everything. And Valverde had many WC which would have suited him perfectly. They maybe didn't finish uphill but 2013 and 2014 were basically perfect for him.

Definitely. That's why I said you can make a case for both and why I rate them pretty much even. Valverde the more gifted, Gilbert the true winner.

Firenze was indeed a good route for him, but not even close to what Valkenburg was for Gilbert. Ponferrada was no better for Valverde than for Gilbert.

Also in answer to Pisti: that he did well so many times, doesn't mean it were great routes for him, but means he's incredibly versatile. I mentioned in my post what the perfect routes are for Valverde. He would most likely become WC there.

 

[Red Rick]

Gilbert has been the best in the world in his own small niche, which is 1-2 minute uphill sprints or thereabouts. Most efforts in hilly classics are longer, but Phil could do some longer efforts at his peak. Valverde on the other hand, was never best in the world in any niche, but more like top 5 in any effort ranging from 2 minutes uphill to 10 minutes uphill (whilst also competing in all longer climbing efforts), and they similar speed in a flat sprint. Therefor, there can't be a WC parcours that suits Valverde as much as Valkenburg did for Gilbert, but Valverde can challenge more parcourses and races.

 

[Flamin]

Re:

Gilbert has been the best in the world in his own small niche, which is 1-2 minute uphill sprints or thereabouts. Most efforts in hilly classics are longer, but Phil could do some longer efforts at his peak. Valverde on the other hand, was never best in the world in any niche, but more like top 5 in any effort ranging from 2 minutes uphill to 10 minutes uphill (whilst also competing in all longer climbing efforts), and they similar speed in a flat sprint. Therefor, there can't be a WC parcours that suits Valverde as much as Valkenburg did for Gilbert, but Valverde can challenge more parcourses and races.

You know the Mur of Huy?

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

Gilbert has been the best in the world in his own small niche, which is 1-2 minute uphill sprints or thereabouts. Most efforts in hilly classics are longer, but Phil could do some longer efforts at his peak. Valverde on the other hand, was never best in the world in any niche, but more like top 5 in any effort ranging from 2 minutes uphill to 10 minutes uphill (whilst also competing in all longer climbing efforts), and they similar speed in a flat sprint. Therefor, there can't be a WC parcours that suits Valverde as much as Valkenburg did for Gilbert, but Valverde can challenge more parcourses and races.

You know the Mur of Huy?

Yeah, so. Purito has won a lot more on similar finishes.

 

[Flamin]

Re: Re:

Gilbert has been the best in the world in his own small niche, which is 1-2 minute uphill sprints or thereabouts. Most efforts in hilly classics are longer, but Phil could do some longer efforts at his peak. Valverde on the other hand, was never best in the world in any niche, but more like top 5 in any effort ranging from 2 minutes uphill to 10 minutes uphill (whilst also competing in all longer climbing efforts), and they similar speed in a flat sprint. Therefor, there can't be a WC parcours that suits Valverde as much as Valkenburg did for Gilbert, but Valverde can challenge more parcourses and races.

You know the Mur of Huy?

Yeah, so. Purito has won a lot more on similar finishes.

So? That's Valverde's Cauberg and he would become WC 9 times out of 10 on that parcours.

 

[Cannibal72]

Re: Re:

Gilbert has been the best in the world in his own small niche, which is 1-2 minute uphill sprints or thereabouts. Most efforts in hilly classics are longer, but Phil could do some longer efforts at his peak. Valverde on the other hand, was never best in the world in any niche, but more like top 5 in any effort ranging from 2 minutes uphill to 10 minutes uphill (whilst also competing in all longer climbing efforts), and they similar speed in a flat sprint. Therefor, there can't be a WC parcours that suits Valverde as much as Valkenburg did for Gilbert, but Valverde can challenge more parcourses and races.

You know the Mur of Huy?

Valverde's strength is his sprint in general. He can also sprint decently on the flat and after a mountain stage; it's just that, for him, his sprint is just as strong going uphill. That doesn't mean that he's a Mur specialist, just that he's the quickest sprinter whose sprint is relatively unaffected by the Mur. Gilbert, on the other hand, has a very specific skill set for stuff like the Cauberg.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re: Re:

Gilbert has been the best in the world in his own small niche, which is 1-2 minute uphill sprints or thereabouts. Most efforts in hilly classics are longer, but Phil could do some longer efforts at his peak. Valverde on the other hand, was never best in the world in any niche, but more like top 5 in any effort ranging from 2 minutes uphill to 10 minutes uphill (whilst also competing in all longer climbing efforts), and they similar speed in a flat sprint. Therefor, there can't be a WC parcours that suits Valverde as much as Valkenburg did for Gilbert, but Valverde can challenge more parcourses and races.

You know the Mur of Huy?

Yeah, so. Purito has won a lot more on similar finishes.

Valverde has 4 F-W, Purito 1

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

Gilbert has been the best in the world in his own small niche, which is 1-2 minute uphill sprints or thereabouts. Most efforts in hilly classics are longer, but Phil could do some longer efforts at his peak. Valverde on the other hand, was never best in the world in any niche, but more like top 5 in any effort ranging from 2 minutes uphill to 10 minutes uphill (whilst also competing in all longer climbing efforts), and they similar speed in a flat sprint. Therefor, there can't be a WC parcours that suits Valverde as much as Valkenburg did for Gilbert, but Valverde can challenge more parcourses and races.

You know the Mur of Huy?

Yeah, so. Purito has won a lot more on similar finishes.

So? That's Valverde's Cauberg and he would become WC 9 times out of 10 on that parcours.

The WC didn't finish on the Cauberg, but 2km after it. Valverde has never won Flèche with a large gap and depending on the direction of the wind he would be caught.

Besides, Froome and Rodriguez kicked Valverde's butt on the Mur de Huy in the Tour de France 2015. The best riders in the world simply don't peak for a race like Flèche.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

Gilbert has been the best in the world in his own small niche, which is 1-2 minute uphill sprints or thereabouts. Most efforts in hilly classics are longer, but Phil could do some longer efforts at his peak. Valverde on the other hand, was never best in the world in any niche, but more like top 5 in any effort ranging from 2 minutes uphill to 10 minutes uphill (whilst also competing in all longer climbing efforts), and they similar speed in a flat sprint. Therefor, there can't be a WC parcours that suits Valverde as much as Valkenburg did for Gilbert, but Valverde can challenge more parcourses and races.

You know the Mur of Huy?

Yeah, so. Purito has won a lot more on similar finishes.

Valverde has 4 F-W, Purito 1

4-2, Purito won on the Mur de Huy in the Tour.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re: Re:

Gilbert has been the best in the world in his own small niche, which is 1-2 minute uphill sprints or thereabouts. Most efforts in hilly classics are longer, but Phil could do some longer efforts at his peak. Valverde on the other hand, was never best in the world in any niche, but more like top 5 in any effort ranging from 2 minutes uphill to 10 minutes uphill (whilst also competing in all longer climbing efforts), and they similar speed in a flat sprint. Therefor, there can't be a WC parcours that suits Valverde as much as Valkenburg did for Gilbert, but Valverde can challenge more parcourses and races.

You know the Mur of Huy?

Yeah, so. Purito has won a lot more on similar finishes.

Valverde has 4 F-W, Purito 1

4-2, Purito won on the Mur de Huy in the Tour.

I think I made it clear that I counted Flèche Wallone wins.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Gilbert has been the best in the world in his own small niche, which is 1-2 minute uphill sprints or thereabouts. Most efforts in hilly classics are longer, but Phil could do some longer efforts at his peak. Valverde on the other hand, was never best in the world in any niche, but more like top 5 in any effort ranging from 2 minutes uphill to 10 minutes uphill (whilst also competing in all longer climbing efforts), and they similar speed in a flat sprint. Therefor, there can't be a WC parcours that suits Valverde as much as Valkenburg did for Gilbert, but Valverde can challenge more parcourses and races.

You know the Mur of Huy?

Yeah, so. Purito has won a lot more on similar finishes.

So? That's Valverde's Cauberg and he would become WC 9 times out of 10 on that parcours.

The WC didn't finish on the Cauberg, but 2km after it. Valverde has never won Flèche with a large gap and depending on the direction of the wind he would be caught.

Besides, Froome and Rodriguez kicked Valverde's butt on the Mur de Huy in the Tour de France 2015. The best riders in the world simply don't peak for a race like Flèche.

The likes of Froome and Contador don't peak for Fleche because they can't. It takes a special kind of rider to hold form from the Ardennes to a GT. Same as Gilbert can't peak in both.

Valverde can and does. That what makes him unique and separates him from the other also rans on this list.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

The likes of Froome and Contador don't peak for Fleche because they can't. It takes a special kind of rider to hold form from the Ardennes to a GT. Same as Gilbert can't peak in both.

Valverde can and does. That what makes him unique and separates him from the other also rans on this list.

From 2009 to 2011 Gilbert peaked for both the cobbled classics and the Ardennes, the only rider in the world to do so successfully. He has been on the podium in the Ronde van Vlaanderen twice, won the Omloop het Volk twice and was on the podium in Milan-San Remo after making the decisive attack on the Poggio that ditched all the sprinters. And let's not pretend Gilbert hasn't been successful in Grand Tours: he won 3 Giro stages, 1 Tour stage and 5 Vuelta stages. He also wore the leader's jersey in the Tour de France and the Vuelta. For someone who isn't a climber, time trial specialist or sprinter that is very impressive. It's a shame he had to skip the Giro this year because of a broken finger... Hopefully he'll do well in the Vuelta.

 

[Flamin]

Re: Re:

Gilbert has been the best in the world in his own small niche, which is 1-2 minute uphill sprints or thereabouts. Most efforts in hilly classics are longer, but Phil could do some longer efforts at his peak. Valverde on the other hand, was never best in the world in any niche, but more like top 5 in any effort ranging from 2 minutes uphill to 10 minutes uphill (whilst also competing in all longer climbing efforts), and they similar speed in a flat sprint. Therefor, there can't be a WC parcours that suits Valverde as much as Valkenburg did for Gilbert, but Valverde can challenge more parcourses and races.

You know the Mur of Huy?

Yeah, so. Purito has won a lot more on similar finishes.

So? That's Valverde's Cauberg and he would become WC 9 times out of 10 on that parcours.

The WC didn't finish on the Cauberg, but 2km after it. Valverde has never won Flèche with a large gap and depending on the direction of the wind he would be caught.

Besides, Froome and Rodriguez kicked Valverde's butt on the Mur de Huy in the Tour de France 2015. The best riders in the world simply don't peak for a race like Flèche.

Even IF Valverde would get caught, he can easily still win the sprint.

Eh, FW is a 1-day race just like the WC. You don't prepare for it the same way than for a GT. Valverde's focus was clearly shifted to the (long) mountains.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

The likes of Froome and Contador don't peak for Fleche because they can't. It takes a special kind of rider to hold form from the Ardennes to a GT. Same as Gilbert can't peak in both.

Valverde can and does. That what makes him unique and separates him from the other also rans on this list.

From 2009 to 2011 Gilbert peaked for both the cobbled classics and the Ardennes, the only rider in the world to do so successfully. He has been on the podium in the Ronde van Vlaanderen twice, won the Omloop het Volk twice and was on the podium in Milan-San Remo after making the decisive attack on the Poggio that ditched all the sprinters. And let's not pretend Gilbert hasn't been successful in Grand Tours: he won 3 Giro stages, 1 Tour stage and 5 Vuelta stages. He also wore the leader's jersey in the Tour de France and the Vuelta. For someone who isn't a climber, time trial specialist or sprinter that is very impressive. It's a shame he had to skip the Giro this year because of a broken finger... Hopefully he'll do well in the Vuelta.

So you accept that he's not among the most talented riders then. Not really sure what he is doing in this discussion in that case. If you're trying to claim he has a better palmares in one day races (surely you're not suggesting his GT performances are comparable to Valverde), then the rankings already do that.

Ultimately, the PCS ranking is an objective calculation of the respective palmares. You choose to put winning above any number of placings - which is a valid personal opinion but isn't really objective. To argue that Gilbert is better than Valverde you would have to look beyond the palmares at the quality of opposition he beat and the breadth of races he did well in, perhaps longevity as well. That clearly doesn't favour Gilbert though.

 

[Mr.White]

Re:

Gilbert has been the best in the world in his own small niche, which is 1-2 minute uphill sprints or thereabouts. Most efforts in hilly classics are longer, but Phil could do some longer efforts at his peak. Valverde on the other hand, was never best in the world in any niche, but more like top 5 in any effort ranging from 2 minutes uphill to 10 minutes uphill (whilst also competing in all longer climbing efforts), and they similar speed in a flat sprint. Therefor, there can't be a WC parcours that suits Valverde as much as Valkenburg did for Gilbert, but Valverde can challenge more parcourses and races.

Valverde is absolute best in uphill sprints. Everything above 5% if he's in the mix in last 200-300 m he's going to win 9/10 times. That's his main strength. He always had that uphill kick, from the very beginning of his career and up until now, and no one comes close. That's why he won Mur de Huy so many times. Purito is stronger on double digit gradients, but if he can't drop him until this 200-300m it's game over!

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

The likes of Froome and Contador don't peak for Fleche because they can't. It takes a special kind of rider to hold form from the Ardennes to a GT. Same as Gilbert can't peak in both.

Valverde can and does. That what makes him unique and separates him from the other also rans on this list.

From 2009 to 2011 Gilbert peaked for both the cobbled classics and the Ardennes, the only rider in the world to do so successfully. He has been on the podium in the Ronde van Vlaanderen twice, won the Omloop het Volk twice and was on the podium in Milan-San Remo after making the decisive attack on the Poggio that ditched all the sprinters. And let's not pretend Gilbert hasn't been successful in Grand Tours: he won 3 Giro stages, 1 Tour stage and 5 Vuelta stages. He also wore the leader's jersey in the Tour de France and the Vuelta. For someone who isn't a climber, time trial specialist or sprinter that is very impressive. It's a shame he had to skip the Giro this year because of a broken finger... Hopefully he'll do well in the Vuelta.

So what's your point here?
If you're making a case that Gilbert is a great rider with great palmares, I agree
If you're trying to say that Gilbert can hold his form like Valverde does, then you're wrong