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

[Netserk]

Re: Re:

Contador has won 9 Grand Tours, what on earth are you talking about? (Let's keep doping out of this discussion as we all know how Valverde achieved his pre-ban wins).

Contador won Grand Tour(s) in 2007 (Tour), 2008 (Giro, Vuelta), 2009 (Tour), 2010 (Tour), 2011 (Giro), 2012 (Vuelta), 2014 (Vuelta) and 2015 (Giro). That's 8 seasons where he won a Grand Tour. Any Grand Tour is bigger than the 5 Monuments. Only the World Championships and Olympics can compete with the "lesser" GTs in prestige.

Contador also won Paris-Nice (2007, 2010), Vuelta al Pais Vasco (2008, 2009, 2014, 2016), Volta a Catalunya (2011) and Tirreno-Adriatico (2014). I consider these races to be more prestigious than the likes of La Flèche Wallonne and Clasica San Sebastian.

It's easy for one of the top 3 riders in the world to win a GT each season these days. All they have to do is avoid the 1 or 2 riders stronger than them in peak form, avoid crashing and make sure they don't carelessly lose time on flat stages. Then they should win. Contador has basically padded out his palmares by beating second rate or tired rivals at the Giro and Vuelta in recent years.

It's uch harder for one of the strongest riders to win a monument. The top riders are always there in prime form, and you only have one shot at it. Luck and tactics can often take it out of your hands and the strongest riders often don't win - particularly in the two hilly monuments.

Ultimately Contador has ridden the Tour de France - by far his biggest race - nine times. By the record books he's won it twice - and one of those was because the strongest rider was pulled with less than a handful of stages to go. He hasn't come close to winning it for six years. Him winning the Vuelta when everyone else is tired and focused on other things, is a bit like how Gilbert still picks up the odd stage win or the odd Amstel gold here and there, but he also hasn't come close to winning a monument for five years.

The comparison is strong.

Active riders with most GT wins:
9 - Contador
4 - Nibali
3 - Froome
2 - None

Active riders with most monument wins:
7 - Boonen & Cancellara
3 - Cunego, Gilbert & Valverde
2 - Purito, Martin, Degenkolb, Kristoff, Gerrans & Devolder

Much easier to win multiple GTs than monuments.... Laaaal

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

I think, Valverde vs Boonen/Cancellara/Contador comparsion discussion are enough.
Boonen/Cancellara/Contador got best palmares in their special area.

Let Valverde compare with all rounders who could do well in GT, Classics.

Cadel Evans -
Won less compared with Valverde.
But he got WC and TDF win. These are biggest win that Valverde missed.
He focused in TDF during his career. Keep beaten Finally get big wins after bio passport implmentation.
He is a clean rider relatively.
1 x TDF; 1 x WC ; 2 x Tour de Romandie ; 1 x Tirreno–Adriatico ; 1 x La Flèche Wallonne

Vincenzo Nibali
1 x TDF ; 1 x Giro ; 2 x Veulta ; 1 x Giro di Lombardia ; 1 x Tirreno–Adriatico
He could do well in classics. But his main targets are GTs.

Alexander Vinokourov
1 x Olympic RR ; 1 x Vuelta ; 2 x LBL ; Amstel Gold Race ; 1 x Critérium du Dauphiné Libéré
Paris–Nice ; 1 x Tour de Suisse

Joaquim Rodríguez
Similar to Valverde. It is clear than Valverde has better result.

Damiano Cunego
1 x Giro ; 3 x Giro di Lombardia ; 1 x Amstel Gold Race

Danilo Di Luca
1 x Giro ; 1 x Giro di Lombardia ; 1 x LBL ; 1 x Amstel Gold Race ; 1 x La Flèche Wallonne

Valverde is at least one level above all those mentioned
Just look at his results at the UCI rankings and you'll get the picture:
2003: 7th
2004: 5th
2005: 22nd
2006: 1st
2007: 4th
2008: 1st
2009: 2nd
2010-2011: suspension
2012: 5th
2013: 3rd
2014: 1st
2015: 1st
2016: 3rd current

Now, go look the results of those you mentioned, they're not even close.
You can try with all riders of the current peloton, result would be the same, no one is close.
Finally, you can look in the past to find riders with similar results. I guess you will find couple of names like Kelly, Hinault, Merckx, Anquetil, Coppi...

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

Contador has won 9 Grand Tours, what on earth are you talking about? (Let's keep doping out of this discussion as we all know how Valverde achieved his pre-ban wins).

Contador won Grand Tour(s) in 2007 (Tour), 2008 (Giro, Vuelta), 2009 (Tour), 2010 (Tour), 2011 (Giro), 2012 (Vuelta), 2014 (Vuelta) and 2015 (Giro). That's 8 seasons where he won a Grand Tour. Any Grand Tour is bigger than the 5 Monuments. Only the World Championships and Olympics can compete with the "lesser" GTs in prestige.

Contador also won Paris-Nice (2007, 2010), Vuelta al Pais Vasco (2008, 2009, 2014, 2016), Volta a Catalunya (2011) and Tirreno-Adriatico (2014). I consider these races to be more prestigious than the likes of La Flèche Wallonne and Clasica San Sebastian.

It's easy for one of the top 3 riders in the world to win a GT each season these days. All they have to do is avoid the 1 or 2 riders stronger than them in peak form, avoid crashing and make sure they don't carelessly lose time on flat stages. Then they should win. Contador has basically padded out his palmares by beating second rate or tired rivals at the Giro and Vuelta in recent years.

It's uch harder for one of the strongest riders to win a monument. The top riders are always there in prime form, and you only have one shot at it. Luck and tactics can often take it out of your hands and the strongest riders often don't win - particularly in the two hilly monuments.

Ultimately Contador has ridden the Tour de France - by far his biggest race - nine times. By the record books he's won it twice - and one of those was because the strongest rider was pulled with less than a handful of stages to go. He hasn't come close to winning it for six years. Him winning the Vuelta when everyone else is tired and focused on other things, is a bit like how Gilbert still picks up the odd stage win or the odd Amstel gold here and there, but he also hasn't come close to winning a monument for five years.

The comparison is strong.

Glad you finally recognize that Valverde is second rate. Also couldn't win the Giro this year (and only made it on the podium because Kruijswijk crashed).

If we're going to scrap Contador's third Tour win you might as well scrap every race Valverde won. The only way he won those races was because he was a major doper. Don't be a hypocrite.

Contador crashed out numerous times for the Tour, which is why he hasn't been able to win it since 2010. But hey, if you want to ignore context, by all means do continue...

Oh and in 2014 Contador beat Chris Froome in the Vuelta, after they both crashed out the Tour. Froome's injuries were less severe and he had more time to recover. Yeah, such terrible competition!

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

I think, Valverde vs Boonen/Cancellara/Contador comparsion discussion are enough.
Boonen/Cancellara/Contador got best palmares in their special area.

Let Valverde compare with all rounders who could do well in GT, Classics.

Cadel Evans -
Won less compared with Valverde.
But he got WC and TDF win. These are biggest win that Valverde missed.
He focused in TDF during his career. Keep beaten Finally get big wins after bio passport implmentation.
He is a clean rider relatively.
1 x TDF; 1 x WC ; 2 x Tour de Romandie ; 1 x Tirreno–Adriatico ; 1 x La Flèche Wallonne

Vincenzo Nibali
1 x TDF ; 1 x Giro ; 2 x Veulta ; 1 x Giro di Lombardia ; 1 x Tirreno–Adriatico
He could do well in classics. But his main targets are GTs.

Alexander Vinokourov
1 x Olympic RR ; 1 x Vuelta ; 2 x LBL ; Amstel Gold Race ; 1 x Critérium du Dauphiné Libéré
Paris–Nice ; 1 x Tour de Suisse

Joaquim Rodríguez
Similar to Valverde. It is clear than Valverde has better result.

Damiano Cunego
1 x Giro ; 3 x Giro di Lombardia ; 1 x Amstel Gold Race

Danilo Di Luca
1 x Giro ; 1 x Giro di Lombardia ; 1 x LBL ; 1 x Amstel Gold Race ; 1 x La Flèche Wallonne

Valverde is at least one level above all those mentioned
Just look at his results at the UCI rankings and you'll get the picture:
2003: 7th
2004: 5th
2005: 22nd
2006: 1st
2007: 4th
2008: 1st
2009: 2nd
2010-2011: suspension
2012: 5th
2013: 3rd
2014: 1st
2015: 1st
2016: 3rd current

Now, go look the results of those you mentioned, they're not even close.
You can try with all riders of the current peloton, result would be the same, no one is close.
Finally, you can look in the past to find riders with similar results. I guess you will find couple of names like Kelly, Hinault, Merckx, Anquetil, Coppi...

Ah, the UCI ranking, the ranking that says winning the Tour of Poland is equal to winning the Ronde van Vlaanderen. :lol:

The ranking that claims a fifth place in the Tour is equal to winning a Monument. :lol:

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Active riders with most GT wins:
9 - Contador
4 - Nibali
3 - Froome
2 - None

Active riders with most monument wins:
7 - Boonen & Cancellara
3 - Cunego, Gilbert & Valverde
2 - Purito, Martin, Degenkolb, Kristoff, Gerrans & Devolder

Much easier to win multiple GTs than monuments.... Laaaal

Exactly, that confirms it. Easier to win GT's than hilly monuments. The three strongest GT riders pick up about one a season if they avoid crashes.

The GT that isn't easy to win is the TdF, because that's the one that every top rider looks to peak for (unless they know they can't win and try to pick up an easier GT instead). And that is the GT that Contador has done nothing in - apart from a 3 year spell early in his career.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Its funny reading El Pistolero's spew his Valverde-hate over and over. Annoying at first, funny now! Second tier rider? Oh god

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Ah, the UCI ranking, the ranking that says winning the Tour of Poland is equal to winning the Ronde van Vlaanderen. :lol:

The ranking that claims a fifth place in the Tour is equal to winning a Monument. :lol:

So what ranking do you want to use? CQ, Procycling? They all point to the same thing. Valverde is head and shoulders above the others in terms of points.

Or do you just want to use your own subjective ranking and ignore the objective facts?

 

[El Pistolero]

Re:

Its funny reading El Pistolero's spew his Valverde-hate over and over. Annoying at first, funny now! Second tier rider? Oh god

DFA called him second rate, not me. It's called using one's shitty argument against themselves. Perhaps a bit too complicated for you to follow.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

Ah, the UCI ranking, the ranking that says winning the Tour of Poland is equal to winning the Ronde van Vlaanderen. :lol:

The ranking that claims a fifth place in the Tour is equal to winning a Monument. :lol:

So what ranking do you want to use? CQ, Procycling? They all point to the same thing. Valverde is head and shoulders above the others in terms of points.

Or do you just want to use your own subjective ranking and ignore the objective facts?

When comparing the great cyclists against each other I simply look at what they managed to win in their careers. Not some useless rankings no one gives a crap about. Cycling isn't tennis.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re: Re:

Its funny reading El Pistolero's spew his Valverde-hate over and over. Annoying at first, funny now! Second tier rider? Oh god

DFA called him second rate, not me. It's called using one's shitty argument against themselves. Perhaps a bit too complicated for you to follow.

Arguing with you is like talking to a kid on this matter, I won't even bother. You not only dislike Valverde, you vehemently hate him. Its totally pointless.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Its funny reading El Pistolero's spew his Valverde-hate over and over. Annoying at first, funny now! Second tier rider? Oh god

DFA called him second rate, not me. It's called using one's shitty argument against themselves. Perhaps a bit too complicated for you to follow.

How is that using an argument against me? In the context of a discussion of cycling's greats, Valverde is a second rate GT rider. He can't quite climb high mountains at the same level as the very best so it is very difficult for him to win. His speciality are hilly one day races. The fact he has accumulated so many podiums in GTs is just testament to his high level diversity.

But Contador should beat Valverde every time in a GT (the fact the hasn't on several occasions is slightly embarrassing), just as Kittel should beat him in a sprint. It would be equally embarrassing for Valverde to get beaten by Contador in a one day race.

 

[Netserk]

"several occasions" He only managed once, after Contador had won the Giro...

 

[DFA123]

Re:

"several occasions" He only managed once, after Contador had won the Giro...

I guess so, if you don't include the ones where Contador carelessly crashed out of. Is bike handling part of a discussion of the best rider - because I think we all know who finishes last out of these four?

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

Its funny reading El Pistolero's spew his Valverde-hate over and over. Annoying at first, funny now! Second tier rider? Oh god

DFA called him second rate, not me. It's called using one's shitty argument against themselves. Perhaps a bit too complicated for you to follow.

How is that using an argument against me? In the context of a discussion of cycling's greats, Valverde is a second rate GT rider. He can't quite climb high mountains at the same level as the very best so it is very difficult for him to win. His speciality are hilly one day races. The fact he has accumulated so many podiums in GTs is just testament to his high level diversity.

But Contador should beat Valverde every time in a GT (the fact the hasn't on several occasions is slightly embarrassing), just as Kittel should beat him in a sprint. It would be equally embarrassing for Valverde to get beaten by Contador in a one day race.

And he never won the World Championships (which is hilly most of the time), Milan-San Remo, Giro di Lombardia, Ronde van Vlaanderen (hey, short hills are hills too), the Giro di Lombardia and the Amstel Gold Race.

And you wonder why Valverde is a level below Boonen, Contador and Cancellara.

If you can climb well you can also get over hills, hardly an indication of diversity. It's just that most great Grand Tour riders don't think LBL is worth sacrificing the Tour for.

LBL these days is nothing more than a reduced bunch sprint. The last decent race was in 2012.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re:

"several occasions" He only managed once, after Contador had won the Giro...

You can argue Valverde was stronger than Contador in 2013 and had finished above him if not for that echelon-stage. In the same breath, you can mention 2014 and 2016.

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

I think, Valverde vs Boonen/Cancellara/Contador comparsion discussion are enough.
Boonen/Cancellara/Contador got best palmares in their special area.

Let Valverde compare with all rounders who could do well in GT, Classics.

Cadel Evans -
Won less compared with Valverde.
But he got WC and TDF win. These are biggest win that Valverde missed.
He focused in TDF during his career. Keep beaten Finally get big wins after bio passport implmentation.
He is a clean rider relatively.
1 x TDF; 1 x WC ; 2 x Tour de Romandie ; 1 x Tirreno–Adriatico ; 1 x La Flèche Wallonne

Vincenzo Nibali
1 x TDF ; 1 x Giro ; 2 x Veulta ; 1 x Giro di Lombardia ; 1 x Tirreno–Adriatico
He could do well in classics. But his main targets are GTs.

Alexander Vinokourov
1 x Olympic RR ; 1 x Vuelta ; 2 x LBL ; Amstel Gold Race ; 1 x Critérium du Dauphiné Libéré
Paris–Nice ; 1 x Tour de Suisse

Joaquim Rodríguez
Similar to Valverde. It is clear than Valverde has better result.

Damiano Cunego
1 x Giro ; 3 x Giro di Lombardia ; 1 x Amstel Gold Race

Danilo Di Luca
1 x Giro ; 1 x Giro di Lombardia ; 1 x LBL ; 1 x Amstel Gold Race ; 1 x La Flèche Wallonne

Valverde is at least one level above all those mentioned
Just look at his results at the UCI rankings and you'll get the picture:
2003: 7th
2004: 5th
2005: 22nd
2006: 1st
2007: 4th
2008: 1st
2009: 2nd
2010-2011: suspension
2012: 5th
2013: 3rd
2014: 1st
2015: 1st
2016: 3rd current

Now, go look the results of those you mentioned, they're not even close.
You can try with all riders of the current peloton, result would be the same, no one is close.
Finally, you can look in the past to find riders with similar results. I guess you will find couple of names like Kelly, Hinault, Merckx, Anquetil, Coppi...

Ah, the UCI ranking, the ranking that says winning the Tour of Poland is equal to winning the Ronde van Vlaanderen. :lol:

The ranking that claims a fifth place in the Tour is equal to winning a Monument. :lol:

No, not that one. I meant that ranking where winners were in this order:
1984: Sean Kelly
1985: Sean Kelly
1986: Sean Kelly
1987: Sean Kelly
1988: Sean Kelly
1989: Laurent Fignon
1990: Gianni Bugno
1991: Gianni Bugno
1992: Miguel Indurain
1993: Miguel Indurain
1994: Tony Rominger
1995: Laurent Jalabert
1996: Laurent Jalabert
1997: Laurent Jalabert
1998: Michele Bartoli
1999: Laurent Jalabert
2000: Francesco Casagrande
2001: Erik Zabel
2002: Erik Zabel
2003: Paolo Bettini
2004: Damiano Cunego
2005: Danilo Di Luca
2006: Alejandro Valverde
2007: Cadel Evans
2008: Alejandro Valverde
2009: Alberto Contador
2010: Joaquim Rodriguez
2011: Philippe Gilbert
2012: Joaquim Rodriguez
2013: Joaquim Rodriguez
2014: Alejandro Valverde
2015: Alejandro Valverde
And 2016 with Peter Sagan currently in the lead

So did you see any random name here, undeserved?
You could make a point certainly about some riders and some years, or points system. But every rider in here on this list would certainly be in the top 3 of every freaking ranking, whatever the points system is.

In CQ or ProCyclingStats Valverde's results are even better. In fact in every ranking you can find Valverde is the top rider of this generation.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Its funny reading El Pistolero's spew his Valverde-hate over and over. Annoying at first, funny now! Second tier rider? Oh god

DFA called him second rate, not me. It's called using one's shitty argument against themselves. Perhaps a bit too complicated for you to follow.

How is that using an argument against me? In the context of a discussion of cycling's greats, Valverde is a second rate GT rider. He can't quite climb high mountains at the same level as the very best so it is very difficult for him to win. His speciality are hilly one day races. The fact he has accumulated so many podiums in GTs is just testament to his high level diversity.

But Contador should beat Valverde every time in a GT (the fact the hasn't on several occasions is slightly embarrassing), just as Kittel should beat him in a sprint. It would be equally embarrassing for Valverde to get beaten by Contador in a one day race.

And he never won the World Championships (which is hilly most of the time), Milan-San Remo, Giro di Lombardia, Ronde van Vlaanderen (hey, short hills are hills too), the Giro di Lombardia and the Amstel Gold Race.

And you wonder why Valverde is a level below Boonen, Contador and Cancellara.

Lol, you've jumped the shark. I'm out.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

Its funny reading El Pistolero's spew his Valverde-hate over and over. Annoying at first, funny now! Second tier rider? Oh god

DFA called him second rate, not me. It's called using one's shitty argument against themselves. Perhaps a bit too complicated for you to follow.

How is that using an argument against me? In the context of a discussion of cycling's greats, Valverde is a second rate GT rider. He can't quite climb high mountains at the same level as the very best so it is very difficult for him to win. His speciality are hilly one day races. The fact he has accumulated so many podiums in GTs is just testament to his high level diversity.

But Contador should beat Valverde every time in a GT (the fact the hasn't on several occasions is slightly embarrassing), just as Kittel should beat him in a sprint. It would be equally embarrassing for Valverde to get beaten by Contador in a one day race.

And he never won the World Championships (which is hilly most of the time), Milan-San Remo, Giro di Lombardia, Ronde van Vlaanderen (hey, short hills are hills too), the Giro di Lombardia and the Amstel Gold Race.

And you wonder why Valverde is a level below Boonen, Contador and Cancellara.

Lol, you've jumped the shark. I'm out.

So first you're making a big deal about Valverde being such a great rider because of his many talents in different areas and when I actually list diverse races you're out? :lol:

Guess what, Nibali was on the podium in Milan-San Remo. What's Valverde's excuse?

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

Its funny reading El Pistolero's spew his Valverde-hate over and over. Annoying at first, funny now! Second tier rider? Oh god

DFA called him second rate, not me. It's called using one's shitty argument against themselves. Perhaps a bit too complicated for you to follow.

How is that using an argument against me? In the context of a discussion of cycling's greats, Valverde is a second rate GT rider. He can't quite climb high mountains at the same level as the very best so it is very difficult for him to win. His speciality are hilly one day races. The fact he has accumulated so many podiums in GTs is just testament to his high level diversity.

But Contador should beat Valverde every time in a GT (the fact the hasn't on several occasions is slightly embarrassing), just as Kittel should beat him in a sprint. It would be equally embarrassing for Valverde to get beaten by Contador in a one day race.

And he never won the World Championships (which is hilly most of the time), Milan-San Remo, Giro di Lombardia, Ronde van Vlaanderen (hey, short hills are hills too), the Giro di Lombardia and the Amstel Gold Race.

And you wonder why Valverde is a level below Boonen, Contador and Cancellara.


If you can climb well you can also get over hills, hardly an indication of diversity. It's just that most great Grand Tour riders don't think LBL is worth sacrificing the Tour for.

LBL these days is nothing more than a reduced bunch sprint. The last decent race was in 2012.

Maybe you should ask Boonen about that

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

Its funny reading El Pistolero's spew his Valverde-hate over and over. Annoying at first, funny now! Second tier rider? Oh god

DFA called him second rate, not me. It's called using one's shitty argument against themselves. Perhaps a bit too complicated for you to follow.

How is that using an argument against me? In the context of a discussion of cycling's greats, Valverde is a second rate GT rider. He can't quite climb high mountains at the same level as the very best so it is very difficult for him to win. His speciality are hilly one day races. The fact he has accumulated so many podiums in GTs is just testament to his high level diversity.

But Contador should beat Valverde every time in a GT (the fact the hasn't on several occasions is slightly embarrassing), just as Kittel should beat him in a sprint. It would be equally embarrassing for Valverde to get beaten by Contador in a one day race.

And he never won the World Championships (which is hilly most of the time), Milan-San Remo, Giro di Lombardia, Ronde van Vlaanderen (hey, short hills are hills too), the Giro di Lombardia and the Amstel Gold Race.

And you wonder why Valverde is a level below Boonen, Contador and Cancellara.


If you can climb well you can also get over hills, hardly an indication of diversity. It's just that most great Grand Tour riders don't think LBL is worth sacrificing the Tour for.

LBL these days is nothing more than a reduced bunch sprint. The last decent race was in 2012.

Maybe you should ask Boonen about that

Boonen doesn't know what he's talking about, he claimed Valverde frequently won 25 races per season, while he never actually accomplished that. He said Sagan isn't the best in the world because he doesn't win enough, yet Sagan has had numerous seasons with 20+ wins. Valverde's record is 15 races in one season. My guess is Boonen was a bit jealous of Sagan and didn't want to give him the credit he deserved.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re: Re:

Exactly, that confirms it. Easier to win GT's than hilly monuments.

This is up there with the most stupid posts I've read on this forum

 

[Mr.White]

Yeah, he don;t know s***. He was maybe on coke

 

[burning]

Re: Re:

DFA called him second rate, not me. It's called using one's shitty argument against themselves. Perhaps a bit too complicated for you to follow.

How is that using an argument against me? In the context of a discussion of cycling's greats, Valverde is a second rate GT rider. He can't quite climb high mountains at the same level as the very best so it is very difficult for him to win. His speciality are hilly one day races. The fact he has accumulated so many podiums in GTs is just testament to his high level diversity.

But Contador should beat Valverde every time in a GT (the fact the hasn't on several occasions is slightly embarrassing), just as Kittel should beat him in a sprint. It would be equally embarrassing for Valverde to get beaten by Contador in a one day race.

And he never won the World Championships (which is hilly most of the time), Milan-San Remo, Giro di Lombardia, Ronde van Vlaanderen (hey, short hills are hills too), the Giro di Lombardia and the Amstel Gold Race.

And you wonder why Valverde is a level below Boonen, Contador and Cancellara.


If you can climb well you can also get over hills, hardly an indication of diversity. It's just that most great Grand Tour riders don't think LBL is worth sacrificing the Tour for.

LBL these days is nothing more than a reduced bunch sprint. The last decent race was in 2012.

Maybe you should ask Boonen about that

Boonen doesn't know what he's talking about, he claimed Valverde frequently won 25 races per season, while he never actually accomplished that. He said Sagan isn't the best in the world because he doesn't win enough, yet Sagan has had numerous seasons with 20+ wins. Valverde's record is 15 races in one season. My guess is Boonen was a bit jealous of Sagan and didn't want to give him the credit he deserved.

1= Numerous? Your hatred to Valverde really makes your arguments worth a lot less.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re:

Yeah, he don;t know s***. He was maybe on coke

“Hij is natuurlijk puur talent, maar de allergrootste talenten zijn voor mij Valverde en Contador. Valverde wint vijfentwintig koersen per jaar, op alle mogelijke manieren. Dat is echt talent in mijn ogen. Sagan blijft een sprinter die iets meer kan. Hij wint ook niet zo veel: vijf tot tien koersen per jaar. Hij is echt een goede renner, maar ook weer niet zo indrukwekkend.”

Boonen, with regard to Sagan:

"He is of course a pure talent, but the biggest talents for me are Valverde and Contador. Valverde wins 25 races per year, in all kinds of ways. That is real talent in my eyes. Sagan remains a sprinter who can do a bit more. He doesn't win a lot as well: only 5 to 10 races per year. He is a really good cyclist, but not that impressive either."

Anyone with a bit of knowledge knows what Boonen said here is complete and utter ***.

 

[Valv.Piti]

I will give you that Boonen really tries to downplay Sagan here, but it still doesn't change the fact that he mentioned Valverde as the biggest talent.