The time of the new "pure Climber" resurgence

[craig1985]

I remember in 2005, Cycle Sport did an issue on climbers, and they interviewed Lucien van Impe, on what a pure climber consisted of, and he talked about climbers having a natural souplesse (suppleness, which he refers to as cadence IIRC), and at the time he rated the last pure climber was Pantani, and he thought Armstrong had a pretty good souplesse, although it wasn't natural and something he worked on. He did consider Chicken in the same bracket as Pantani, but to a lesser extent and wasn't complimentary on Virenque (ie lost a bunch of time so he can get away in a break and pick up a lot of points, and that would be it). He also mentioned about pure climbers who struggle on the flat when the sped is really high (FYI I'm paraphrasing on what van Impe considered to be a pure climber and offer a different perspective when considering what a pure climber is, and not my own opinion).

I would consider Purito to be one of the best in the world on the steep uphill finishes, along with Phil Gilbert. As for Rujano, I can consider him that his climbing is really his (only) strong point but he's not quite in the league of Contador for mine, yes he won a stage at the Giro last year, but that's only because Contador let him have the win. In some ways I would put Purito and Rujano in the same bracket, climbing is their strong point, but just not as good as Contador. I also think Gadret deserves a mention in that he does well on the climbs of the Giro, but isn't much use at time trialling and got dropped on some flat stages of the Tour when the peloton was going flat out in the run in to the finishes. In saying that though, I don't think Contador can be considered a "pure climber" in the strictest definition of the word because he's too good of a time trialist (when you think back to the time trial that he won in the '09 Tour when he even beat Spartacus, and won the prolouge of that year's Paris-Nice), but I guess in today's peloton he certainly is the best climber in the world and consistently show this day-in, day-out on multiple GT stages where there is a lot of climbing.

Riders like Evans, Menchov, Ullrich built part of their GT's wins on being very good at time trialling, and even though they haven't won a GT, Klöden and Levi in my view are time trialists who can climb very well. The same for Wiggins as well (and to a lesser extent, Chris Froome).

 

[42x16ss]

I think I have a funny view of who is classified as a "pure climber" here. I've always considered a pure climber to be a rider who - regardless of other strengths - is naturally strong on climbs with excellent rythm/cadence and an ability to accelerate and leave others behind without having to work and develop this ability from scratch.

IMHO Contador would have to be the purest climber since Pantani, with the possible exceptions of 05-07 Rasmussen, 02-03 Mayo, Sastre and Beloki. Yes, Contador has an excellent TT and a decent descent, but his technique and acceleration on climbs (especially longer ones) is so natural and fluid that he has to be classified as a "pure" climber.

My 2c

 

[La Pandera]

Yeah i agree. The thinking rider is almost gone from the sport ,with a few exceptions, as they rely too much on tvs in the team cars.

Also they're more content on maintaining their position in the gc and will take few chances to advance it that might be considered risky or unorthodox. I think that is why Armstrong always referred to Pantani as "that little sh!t starter" because Pantani refused to follow his and Bruyneel's script that all the rest of his opponents seemed content with. That is why I loved Pantani!

 

[La Pandera]

so in 1998 there were no radios?
when soler attacked the shiit out of them day after day there were no radios?when contador and andy attacked there were no radios?jeebus i hope they won't get rid of them just because of these people who think radios destroy the sport or something.defending tactics exist not because of the radios they exist because there are riders who won't attack anyway,no balls.

That is Herrera's point. Soler is Colombian and that style of racing is bred into them. Soler was a virtual unknown, was pretty far behind in the gc and thus was no threat, except to those chasing the KOM jersey. For these reasons he was given a certain amount of latitude. For all his efforts he still finished outside of the top 10, I believe finishing 11th.

Andy's and Contador's attacks were truly exceptions and not the rule for this era. Both indicated to the media afterwards that they had little to lose. Andy had already blown his chances with his less than brave effort on a rainy descent, losing valuable time. Contador was there for the win and with the series of crashes and time loss coupled with the Giro in his legs his hopes of winning the Tour were lost, so the only thing he had to lose was a position in the gc that meant little to him. Add to this scenario with so many contenders having crashed out of the race prior to these efforts, there were far fewer teams with anything at stake and thus fewer willing to assist in taking up the chase to reel in the escapees.

 

[La Pandera]

Vanendert has a good descend in him, as we saw at the Tourmalet this year at the Tour where he followed Samuel Sanchez. He's also great on the hills.

For me a pure climber is someone who excells in the mountains, but isn't a particulary good time trialist, descender and doesn't care all that much about one day races. I consider Carlos Sastre to be a pure climber. Rujano and Anton also fit that bill. I wouldn't call Dan Martin a pure climber. He has a great sprint and is also pretty good in one day races. And let's be honest, his climbing skills aren't all that spectacular. Too bad he has a pollen allergy or he would have showed something by now in the Ardennes.

Now Anton has finished well in Fleche Wallone so one can't say that he doesn't care about one day races, of course unless you're going to get me on the technicality of races being plural.

 

[La Pandera]

I think I have a funny view of who is classified as a "pure climber" here. I've always considered a pure climber to be a rider who - regardless of other strengths - is naturally strong on climbs with excellent rythm/cadence and an ability to accelerate and leave others behind without having to work and develop this ability from scratch.

IMHO Contador would have to be the purest climber since Pantani, with the possible exceptions of 05-07 Rasmussen, 02-03 Mayo, Sastre and Beloki. Yes, Contador has an excellent TT and a decent descent, but his technique and acceleration on climbs (especially longer ones) is so natural and fluid that he has to be classified as a "pure" climber.

My 2c

I agree. Regardless of his TT prowess, Contador's ability to excell on all types of climbs, his completely unmatched acceleration, his consistent level of performance in the mountains, and what Craig referenced Van Impe saying about (using the English word) the supple nature of his pedaling action when climbing, has to make Contador the most exceptional of the current "pure climbers" and purest also. There is no other current rider that exhibits such overall beauty in their climbing style (excuse my fanboy admiration ).

 

[craig1985]

Also they're more content on maintaining their position in the gc and will take few chances to advance it that might be considered risky or unorthodox. I think that is why Armstrong always referred to Pantani as "that little sh!t starter" because Pantani refused to follow his and Bruyneel's script that all the rest of his opponents seemed content with. That is why I loved Pantani!

I love looking at youtube clips of the '98 and '99 Giri, sure you, I, and everybody know the score (wrt to the clinic), but all his rivals were on the same stuff, and Pantani was entertaining and great to watch.

 

[Cimber]

Mayo, Sella, Sastre and Piepoli

Not really, he was a decent TTer too tbh.

 

[the3verB]

Riders like Evans, Menchov, Ullrich built part of their GT's wins on being very good at time trialling, and even though they haven't won a GT, Klöden and Levi in my view are time trialists who can climb very well. The same for Wiggins as well (and to a lesser extent, Chris Froome).

Exactly! Like Oscar Pereiro.

 

[El Pistolero]

Now Anton has finished well in Fleche Wallone so one can't say that he doesn't care about one day races, of course unless you're going to get me on the technicality of races being plural.

If the only one day race you care about is a race that always ends in a uphill peloton sprint then you don't really care much about one day races. Even Carlos Sastre was good last year in Clasica San Sebastian. Flèche Wallonne is the exception that confirms the rule for Igor Anton. His main focus has always been climbing.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

I think that the people touting Contador are missing a key distinction between a great climber and a pure climber. Contador is certainly a great climber, but his skill set is that of a consummate GC rider - he is excellent at both climbing and the TT. The pure climber, by definition, should be much more lopsided in his abilities.

Andy Schleck, his only real rival when it comes to climbing prowess, is more of a pure climber. Even then, his TT is arguably too good.

Someone can be a pure climber while still being worse at climbing than the very best GC men, simply because all they bring to the table is their ability to climb. Climbing is the be all and end all of their career. Quite a few talented but distinctly limited climbing domestiques are closer to being "pure climbers" than a Contador.

 

[Angliru]

If the only one day race you care about is a race that always ends in a uphill peloton sprint then you don't really care much about one day races. Even Carlos Sastre was good last year in Clasica San Sebastian. Flèche Wallonne is the exception that confirms the rule for Igor Anton. His main focus has always been climbing.

How did you surmise from my response that Fleche Wallone is the only one day race that I care about? Sometimes I think you're purposely unpleasant just for the fun of it. I wasn't certain of the other one day event that he finished well in and didn't list it.

It was LBL in 2010 or 2009. According to Wikipedia he finished 6th.
I think this shows he has ambitions beyond stage races and simply climbing.

 

[Angliru]

I think that the people touting Contador are missing a key distinction between a great climber and a pure climber. Contador is certainly a great climber, but his skill set is that of a consummate GC rider - he is excellent at both climbing and the TT. The pure climber, by definition, should be much more lopsided in his abilities.

Andy Schleck, his only real rival when it comes to climbing prowess, is more of a pure climber. Even then, his TT is arguably too good.

Someone can be a pure climber while still being worse at climbing than the very best GC men, simply because all they bring to the table is their ability to climb. Climbing is the be all and end all of their career. Quite a few talented but distinctly limited climbing domestiques are closer to being "pure climbers" than a Contador.

I stand corrected. Good points!

 

[Magnus]

I think that the people touting Contador are missing a key distinction between a great climber and a pure climber. Contador is certainly a great climber, but his skill set is that of a consummate GC rider - he is excellent at both climbing and the TT. The pure climber, by definition, should be much more lopsided in his abilities.

Andy Schleck, his only real rival when it comes to climbing prowess, is more of a pure climber. Even then, his TT is arguably too good.

Someone can be a pure climber while still being worse at climbing than the very best GC men, simply because all they bring to the table is their ability to climb. Climbing is the be all and end all of their career. Quite a few talented but distinctly limited climbing domestiques are closer to being "pure climbers" than a Contador.

If Andy Schlecks' TT is to good to be a pure climber I'd like to know who could be considered a pure climber.

I mean, Pantani was 3rd in the last tt when he won the tour in '98.
Gaul won all th tt's when he won and Bahamontes was 10'th and 13'th in the flat tt's when he won.

 

[uphillstruggle]

Gaul won all th tt's when he won

Gaul is a funny one since he is always referred to as a quintessential climber yet he doesn't fit many of the prerequisites that many people have put forward here. He manly stayed seated while climbing, and some think that getting out of the saddle is a attribute of a real climber. He was a good time-trialer too, he regularly won or placed highly against the clock.

 

[Arnout]

If the only one day race you care about is a race that always ends in a uphill peloton sprint then you don't really care much about one day races. Even Carlos Sastre was good last year in Clasica San Sebastian. Flèche Wallonne is the exception that confirms the rule for Igor Anton. His main focus has always been climbing.

Exception that confirms the rule? I've never understood that sentence as it doesn't make sense on any level. At all.

And Anton also finished in top-10 of LBL last two years (added to the points of Angliru).

 

[theyoungest]

Exception that confirms the rule? I've never understood that sentence as it doesn't make sense on any level. At all.

And Anton also finished in top-10 of LBL last two years (added to the points of Angliru).

The fact that something is rare confirms that the opposite is generally true. Hence: the exception confirms the rule. Makes a lot of sense.

 

[Duartista]

If Andy Schlecks' TT is to good to be a pure climber I'd like to know who could be considered a pure climber.

I mean, Pantani was 3rd in the last tt when he won the tour in '98.
Gaul won all th tt's when he won and Bahamontes was 10'th and 13'th in the flat tt's when he won.

You are right about Gaul (and Schleck), but I think those example are misleading for Pantani and Bahamontes. Bahamontes was over 6 minutes down in the TT when he finished 13th, whilst that 3rd place for Pantani in 1998 was a bit of a freak result.

 

[El Pistolero]

How did you surmise from my response that Fleche Wallone is the only one day race that I care about? Sometimes I think you're purposely unpleasant just for the fun of it. I wasn't certain of the other one day event that he finished well in and didn't list it.

It was LBL in 2010 or 2009. According to Wikipedia he finished 6th.
I think this shows he has ambitions beyond stage races and simply climbing.

Sorry, that was not directed personally at you, but more a general statement

Ambition beyond stage races would be like Jrod or Valverde, they really makes the classics a goal for them self every year, Anton merely rides it in preperation for the further season and hopes for the best. Contador also has a top 10 in LBL and FW, but it's safe to say he hasn't had much interest in one day races as of yet. That might change in the future though, depending his doping case of course.

 

[El Pistolero]

Exception that confirms the rule? I've never understood that sentence as it doesn't make sense on any level. At all.

And Anton also finished in top-10 of LBL last two years (added to the points of Angliru).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule

This should once and for all explain you that sentence

Was Anton in LBL last year? Hmm, could be, didn't see him as the camera only had interest for Phil and Frandy.

 

[Angliru]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule

This should once and for all explain you that sentence

Was Anton in LBL last year? Hmm, could be, didn't see him as the camera only had interest for Phil and Frandy.

...and that proves your point? I kind of lost track of what it was.

If he was there and for whatever reason wasn't a factor, that isn't representative of him "not caring about" one day races. The fact that he's there as his team's likely protected rider with hopes and the potential to do fairly well, gaining valuable points, to me is indicative of him "caring" about those events (Fleche Wallone and LBL). To say he doesn't care about these events is to say that he doesn't try to arrive in some type of peak form for them and additionally doesn't reflect well on all the riders that make this event one of their goals and finish behind him.

I agree by the way that media/moto's focus was primarily on Phil and the Schleck's.

I'd never heard that phrase before. I'd heard "exception to the rule" but not "exception confirms the rule".

 

[Angliru]

Sorry, that was not directed personally at you, but more a general statement

Ambition beyond stage races would be like Jrod or Valverde, they really makes the classics a goal for them self every year, Anton merely rides it in preperation for the further season and hopes for the best. Contador also has a top 10 in LBL and FW, but it's safe to say he hasn't had much interest in one day races as of yet. That might change in the future though, depending his doping case of course.

No problem.

I don't agree though that Anton doesn't make them (the Ardennes, Fleche Wallone and LBL specifically, I don't know about AGR) personal goals.

 

[Froome19]

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...-may-focus-everything-on-Vuelta-a-Espana.aspx

If I do only the Vuelta, there will be many other objectives which suit me well and in which I will do as well as possible, from the Ardennes Classics to the Tour of Romandie.”
Seems like Anton is focusing on the Ardennes next year

 

[El Pistolero]

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...-may-focus-everything-on-Vuelta-a-Espana.aspx

If I do only the Vuelta, there will be many other objectives which suit me well and in which I will do as well as possible, from the Ardennes Classics to the Tour of Romandie.”
Seems like Anton is focusing on the Ardennes next year

Well, that's good to hear. Scrap him from my list than for now

 

[craig1985]

So for those that was watching cycling at the time, where you would classify Miguel Indurain? A climber who is excellent at time trialling, or a time trialist who was an excellent climber?