Rough Attempt at an All-Time Ranking

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
It's time for the first Colombian GT winner, three almost forgotten Tour winners, and a cyclo-cross champion.

130 Luis Herrera 195
129 Italo Zilioli 197
128 Wout Van Aert 197
127 Denis Menchov 197
126 Gianbattista Baronchelli 200
125 Gastone Nencini 200
124 Louis Trousselier 201
123 Andrea Tafi 205
122 Georges Ronsse 205
121 Sylvère Maes 205

Van Aert is the second youngest rider in this list. Those silver medals on the road give him the extra points to enter this list.
Wondering who the youngest will be
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
I don't really have an opinion regarding these rankings but reading the discussions about Valverde vs Boonen (and others) I remembered that Boonen himself said that Valverde was/is in his opinion the best of their generation.

Found the article:


He says:

"Valverde is simply the best rider of our generation. Head and shoulders (above the rest)."

Make of that what you will.
 
While i'm not the biggest fan of the site, I think for this topic the PCS all-time ranking does a decent enough job. It doesn't simply take the normal points and adds them over the duration of a rider's career, but they only take into account the best results. I think that's fair considering the fact that if you want to be "part of the discussion" you can't only have a lot of top 10 places, you mainly have to have a lot of wins and podiums. To be the considered among the best, 10 times 8th shouldn't count nearly as much as 1 or 2 actual wins.

Summation of points in level 1 races and higher. Only the points of the top-10 are considered, in stages the top-3. The points are computed according to the following formula: (PCS Points) / result / 10 . If a rider received 100 points for 2nd place, it contributes 100/2/10 = 5 points to his all time total. A rider winning the final GC in the Tour de France contributes 500/1/10 = 50 points to this total. A rider needs at least 50 points to make it to the ranking.
100/2029 results.
#RiderPoints
1Merckx Eddy3767
2Moser Francesco2101
3Kelly Sean2058
4De Vlaeminck Roger1968
5Hinault Bernard1963
6Anquetil Jacques1842
7Valverde Alejandro1805
8Van Looy Rik1681
9Bartali Gino1504
10Jalabert Laurent1498
11Coppi Fausto1496
12Saronni Giuseppe1492
13Gimondi Felice1444
14Maertens Freddy1437
15Zoetemelk Joop1421
16Rominger Tony1329
17Sagan Peter1284
18Zabel Erik1273
19Indurain Miguel1270
20Binda Alfredo1265
21Poulidor Raymond1260
22Girardengo Costante1189
23Bitossi Franco1178
24Cipollini Mario1133
25Boonen Tom1123
26Rebellin Davide1090
27Cavendish Mark1089
28Gilbert Philippe1061
29Contador Alberto1059
30Cancellara Fabian1041
31Kübler Ferdinand1004
32Greipel André1003
33Bobet Louison1001
34Petacchi Alessandro988
35Nibali Vincenzo943
36Van Springel Herman926
37Museeuw Johan926
38Magni Fiorenzo917
39Poblet Miguel914
40Froome Chris909
41Ocaña Luis901
42Zülle Alex869
43Perurena Domingo866
44Bettini Paolo851
45Godefroot Walter831
46Raas Jan821
47McEwen Robbie820
48Roglič Primož806
49Freire Óscar802
50Verbeeck Frans796
51Bugno Gianni795
52Roche Stephen793
53Rodríguez Joaquim793
54Kristoff Alexander788
55Fignon Laurent786
56Van Steenbergen Rik786
57Baronchelli Gianbattista782
58Lejarreta Marino768
59Guerra Learco768
60Janssen Jan759
61Knetemann Gerrie758
62Van Avermaet Greg757
63Mottet Charly754
64Vanderaerden Eric750
65Anderson Phil747
66Argentin Moreno740
67Bartoli Michele734
68Frantz Nicolas730
69Koblet Hugo723
70Altig Rudi721
71Casagrande Francesco709
72Vinokourov Alexandre706
73Martin Tony704
74Thévenet Bernard701
75Quintana Nairo694
76LeMond Greg694
77Rodríguez Delio694
78Fondriest Maurizio691
79Chiappucci Claudio676
80Evans Cadel676
81Motta Gianni664
82Sørensen Rolf661
83Viviani Elia659
84Ullrich Jan657
85Dancelli Michele651
86Boasson Hagen Edvald649
87Darrigade André648
88Lasa Miguel María640
89Gavazzi Pierino638
90Démare Arnaud633
91van der Poel Adrie629
92Basso Marino622
93Cañardo Mariano613
94Belloni Gaetano611
95Di Luca Danilo604
96Olano Abraham601
97Voigt Jens601
98Leducq André598
99Adorni Vittorio590
100Cunego Damiano589

101Sánchez Samuel584
102Hushovd Thor584
103Kittel Marcel578
104Alaphilippe Julian577
105Delgado Pedro576
106Armstrong Lance572
107Gaul Charly570
108Planckaert Eddy566
109Zilioli Italo561
110Berrendero Julián555
111Bontempi Guido553
112Pollentier Michel553
113Degenkolb John550
114Bahamontes Federico544
115Kirsipuu Jaan542
116Kuiper Hennie541
117Tchmil Andrei541
118Porte Richie532
119Pélissier Henri527
120Schotte Briek519
121Ekimov Viatcheslav518
122Baldini Ercole516
123Criquielion Claude516
124Richard Pascal514
125Thurau Dietrich510
126Peeters Ludo510
127Impanis Raymond510
128Ockers Stan509
129Defilippis Nino506
130Van Impe Lucien501
131Breukink Erik497
132Brunero Giovanni496
133Van Linden Rik495
134Stablinski Jean495
135Faber François494
136Karstens Gerben492
137Kwiatkowski Michał491
138Gerrans Simon486
139Bouhanni Nacer484
140Vandenbroucke Jean-Luc483
141Dekker Erik480
142Matthews Michael478
143Contini Silvano478
144Ulissi Diego477
145Magne Antonin476
146Sercu Patrick476
147Ludwig Olaf475
148Battaglin Giovanni474
149Nijdam Jelle474
150Garrigou Gustave471
151Duclos-Lassalle Gilbert468
152Martin Dan467
153Fuglsang Jakob466
154Heras Roberto465
155Costa Rui464
156Chavanel Sylvain460
157Basso Ivan459
158Bennati Daniele459
159Reybrouck Guido454
160Thys Philippe454
161Garzelli Stefano453
162Pogačar Tadej450
163Pozzato Filippo446
164De Bruyne Alfred446
165Thomas Geraint444
166Wiggins Bradley443
167Simoni Gilberto440
168Panizza Wladimiro440
169Dufaux Laurent438
170Leipheimer Levi437
171Agostinho Joaquim435
172Sánchez Luis León433
173Vandenbroucke Frank428
174Dumoulin Tom427
175van Poppel Jean-Paul423
176Leoni Adolfo418
177Voeckler Thomas417
178Abduzhaparov Djamolidine416
179Pinot Thibaut415
180Tafi Andrea413
181de Wolf Fons410
182Svorada Ján407
183Colbrelli Sonny404
184Ewan Caleb403
185van der Velde Johan401
186van Aert Wout399
187Galetti Carlo398
188Knudsen Knut397
189Millar Robert396
190Willems Daniel396
191Steels Tom396
192Pantani Marco395
193Terpstra Niki393
194Mollema Bauke388
195Marie Thierry387
196Alavoine Jean387
197Petit-Breton Lucien385
198Kint Marcel384
199O'Grady Stuart382
200Wellens Tim382
 
Last edited:
While i'm not the biggest fan of the site, I think for this topic the PCS all-time ranking does a decent enough job. It doesn't simply take the normal points and adds them over the duration of a rider's career, but they only take into account the best results. I think that's fair considering the fact that if you want to be "part of the discussion" you can't only have a lot of top 10 places, you mainly have to have a lot of wins and podiums. To be the considered among the best, 10 times 8th shouldn't count nearly as much as 1 or 2 actual wins.
27 Cavendish
28 Gilbert
29 Contador
@Red Rick Surely this is good enough for you to summon the ghost of Pisti?
 
I think the PCS ranking does a pretty poor job at this actually, and if you filter retired riders it becomes clear why:

  1. Valverde 1805
  2. Sagan 1284
  3. Rebellin 1090
  4. Cavendish 1089
  5. Gilbert 1061
  6. Greipel 1003
  7. Nibali 943
  8. Froome 909
  9. Roglic 806
  10. Kristoff 788
  11. Van Avermaet 757
Very clearly biased towards sprinters and to an extent also cobbles specialists, which suggests GC results (and GC wins in particular) are being underrated, and stage wins (and maybe also classics placements) are being overrated. No ranking should have Greipel ahead of both Nibali and Froome. Valverde sitting at double of Froome's score is also very obviously wrong. In addition, the likes of Bouhanni and Wellens making the top 200 is hilarious to me.
 
I think the PCS ranking does a pretty poor job at this actually, and if you filter retired riders it becomes clear why:

  1. Valverde 1805
  2. Sagan 1284
  3. Rebellin 1090
  4. Cavendish 1089
  5. Gilbert 1061
  6. Greipel 1003
  7. Nibali 943
  8. Froome 909
  9. Roglic 806
  10. Kristoff 788
  11. Van Avermaet 757
Very clearly biased towards sprinters and to an extent also cobbles specialists, which suggests GC results (and GC wins in particular) are being underrated, and stage wins (and maybe also classics placements) are being overrated. No ranking should have Greipel ahead of both Nibali and Froome. Valverde sitting at double of Froome's score is also very obviously wrong.
Points are always biased towards sprinters, because the best sprinters tend to win a lot and there simply are many sprint opportunities per season. This is part of basically any point based system i believe, unless you start devaluing the sprint races. I'm all for doing that, but i guess they are simply a big part of cycling. It's a bit like in tennis, where often big serve guys tend to go further than "better" players with a mediocre serve.

Also, keep in mind the length of a career helps in a points based system. Guys like Greipel or Valverde have been earning points for double as long as many others who quit a lot sooner. Froome for instance was top dog during 5 or 6 years, but did little before and after.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Sandisfan
Or maybe it's just that annual rankings really overrate lesser races and podiums and lesser placings precisely cause it's the point of annual rankings to legitimize the lesser races more so thant the biggest races that everyone would love to win even if it gave 0 points.

And many of these all time rankings just add all the yearly points together. If you just look at point valuations of certain achievements there are so many absolute piss takes to not dismiss the rankings entirely.

So when a ranking goes something like Rebellin > Contador/Nibali with Valverde at #4, I don't think it's ridiculous at all to suggest reengineering it a LOT.
Wait till you get to the second page and see the 101-200 order.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
In the next group we have four Giro winners from different eras, and the first of three Australians to show up.

120 Tom Dumoulin 206
119 Giuseppe Olmo 208
118 Eric Vanderaerden 208
117 Lucien Petit-Breton 209
116 Francesco Casagrande 210
115 Heiri Suter 210
114 Vittorio Adorni 210
113 Ercole Baldini 213
112 Damiano Cunego 215
111 Phil Anderson 216

Vanderaerden and Suter have both won Flanders & Roubaix. The latter was the first to win them in the same year: 1923.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
While i'm not the biggest fan of the site, I think for this topic the PCS all-time ranking does a decent enough job. It doesn't simply take the normal points and adds them over the duration of a rider's career, but they only take into account the best results. I think that's fair considering the fact that if you want to be "part of the discussion" you can't only have a lot of top 10 places, you mainly have to have a lot of wins and podiums. To be the considered among the best, 10 times 8th shouldn't count nearly as much as 1 or 2 actual wins.
Valverde is better than Coppi apparently, seems legit.
 
Valverde is better than Coppi apparently, seems legit.
Coppi had some prime years taken away from him during WWII. Valverde has been riding over 20 years and has always been a contender in most races he started. This is what a ranking based on points does. You could try to rate or rank riders according to their peak years, and then people can start to debate whether peak Froome is better than peak Hinault for instance. And i'm guessing that wouldn't be ok either.

The reason why i think PCS's points based system (as far as points based systems go) is actually good is because it rewards top results. Otherwise you could get riders who had a long career, hardly ever winning, yet scoring very high due to lots of "good" results.

But you will find no ranking on which everybody agrees. Either it will be very subjective, or it'll need to be interpreted according to the rules it follows.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Coppi had some prime years taken away from him during WWII. Valverde has been riding over 20 years and has always been a contender in most races he started. This is what a ranking based on points does. You could try to rate or rank riders according to their peak years, and then people can start to debate whether peak Froome is better than peak Hinault for instance. And i'm guessing that wouldn't be ok either.

The reason why i think PCS's points based system (as far as points based systems go) is actually good is because it rewards top results. Otherwise you could get riders who had a long career, hardly ever winning, yet scoring very high due to lots of "good" results.

But you will find no ranking on which everybody agrees. Either it will be very subjective, or it'll need to be interpreted according to the rules it follows.
PCS actually makes an effort to use a different system for the all time list. Dividing points by a result is quite aggressive.

But then they proceed to count every race from .1 and up without any other adjustments. So that ranking will literally give Sagan more points for winning Okolo Slovenska than a Simon Yates gets for finishing 3rd in the Giro. And PCS gives a LOT of points for stage wins
 
How many riders in total have won the Tour de France?
He didn't even won it.
Nevertheless, many of the Tour winners wouldn't be in top 100. The list is long: Bernal (of course, time is on his side), Thomas, Schleck, Pereiro, Riis, Pingeon, Aimar, Walkowiak, Robic, Lapebie, R.Maes, De Waele, L.Buysse, Lambot, Scieur, Defraye, Pottier, Trousselier, Cornet and Garin.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Sandisfan
The next batch contains four world champions and one Olympic champion.

110 Stan Ockers 216
109 Jean Alavoine 217
108 Georges Speicher 221
107 Michel Pollentier 222
106 Jean Stablinski 225
105 José Manuel Fuente 229
104 Greg Van Avermaet 232
103 Guido Bontempi 236
102 Gilberto Simoni 239
101 Marcel Kint 240

This countdown serves well as a journey through cycling history. Tomorrow we will enter the top 100.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS