With the current routes of the races - Is it fair to say that in order to win all five monuments over the course of a riders career, the rider has to alter its physique/skills according to a certain pattern in order to maximize the chances of winning each race = have a certain number of tries at each race with an acceptable physical characteristic = beeing on par with the best contenders, beeing rated close to -or- 1, in a normalized skill-set comparison of the current contending field, on several of those occations for a given targeted race?
An example:
Early stage of career: Break through at age 20 as a medium/light weight puncheur, suitable for shorter climbs. Thinking the lieks of early Kwiatkowski or Alaphilippe currently. Win either Leige / Lombardia before age 27-28.
Mid stage career: Increase weight/power slightly. Increase in endurance/throughput in the endgame. Win Milan-San Remo and the other puncheur/climber monument that is lacking. Ride roubaix for experience only.
Late stage career: Bulk up even more. Shift focus towards ronde and roubaix. Target ronde first as it is the more natural transition from the hilly classics. Ride Roubaix to get the experience.
End of career: Bulk up and focus everything on Roubaix. Collect the last monument win.
Sidenotes: The other transition I.e. Break through as a cobbled rider winning roubaix/ronde, and then shifting towards climbing in late stage of the career.. Are there any examples of a skill-set transition throughout a riders career in this direction in the current/past field?
This transition pattern fits Gilberts career trajectory -Should he have won Milano-Sanremo in 2010 or more likely in 2011 as has been mentioned in this thread previously- abit. Also taken into account that The lombardia route was significantly more punchy and less climby at the time of his two wins, of course.