The time of the new "pure Climber" resurgence

[Forunculo]

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?

The second one, but I remember he pulled performances at mountains like Evans at Galibier not once but many.

 

[La Pandera]

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?

I really don't like pigeon-holing riders if I don't have to. Indurain showed that he was head and shoulders above his opponents versus the clock, a man among boys. In the mountains he held his own, answering his opponents attacks by slowly reeling them in or just limiting the damage knowing that he would annihilate them (my words not his) in the ITT's.

I believe he once went on the attack just to show the naysayers that he could and it was impressive. I believe he had more available in the mountains but he chose let others gain the glory and win the stages in the mountains knowing that his ultimate goal of a Tour victory was not threatened by his graciousness. I'm sure many a rider truly appreciates this to this day.

Ultimately it goes without saying that he was a great time trialist, a talent that he put on full display at every opportunity. That was his trump card, while climbing he did quite well but it was not his chief asset.

 

[movingtarget]

The second one, but I remember he pulled performances at mountains like Evans at Galibier not once but many.

Yes, I think it's a good comparison. He was very similar to Evans, both were diesels but Indurain was the better time triallist. Evans was the more versatile also being able to ride well in classics and one day races. How many times would you see Rominger drop Indurain on a mountain only for Indurain to claw time back. Evans similarly had to do the same against Contador and Schleck with varying degrees of success except for 2011 of course.

 

[No_Balls]

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?

A freak of nature first of all. With immense power that (i belive) helped him a lot even uphill. Hard to tell wheter or not he could hold his own without this capabilities but he was that much superior, fysiological speaking, so he was a very capable climber, despite his large frame.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Pure climbers in the current péloton, for my money:

Domenico Pozzovivo
Igor Antón
José Rujano
Emanuele Sella
Sergio Pardilla
Joaquím Rodríguez
Przemysław Niemiec
Mikel Nieve
Sylwia Kapusta
David Arroyo
Sylwester Szmyd
David Moncoutié
Mara Abbott
John Gadret (sort of)
André Cardoso

 

[El Pistolero]

Pure climbers in the current péloton, for my money:

Domenico Pozzovivo
Igor Antón
José Rujano
Emanuele Sella
Sergio Pardilla
Joaquím Rodríguez
Przemysław Niemiec
Mikel Nieve
Sylwia Kapusta
David Arroyo
Sylwester Szmyd
David Moncoutié
Mara Abbott
John Gadret (sort of)
André Cardoso

David Arroyo has some mean descending skills. Not sure if I'd call Gadret and Rodriguez pure climbers as well. Gadret still does cyclo-cross for example in the winter. Rodriguez has a pretty nasty uphill kick on hills like the Cauberg. How many pure climbers do you see sprint up that hill?

 

[Magnus]

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?

An absolutely excellent time trialist that was able to follow (edit: or at least limit his losses against) the strongest in the mountains. And then there was Hautacam '94 and Liege '95.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

David Arroyo has some mean descending skills. Not sure if I'd call Gadret and Rodriguez pure climbers as well. Gadret still does cyclo-cross for example in the winter. Rodriguez has a pretty nasty uphill kick on hills like the Cauberg. How many pure climbers do you see sprint up that hill?

Arroyo is a great descender, but the rouleur, puncheur and TT skills are severely lacking. Gadret I marked as a sort of because he seems to lack all other skills for a roadie, however he does still compete in cyclocross (lapped 3 laps from home in the Worlds). Rodríguez can be considered a pure climber/puncheur cross, but the reason he's good as a puncheur is due to his climbing ability; he's got that uphill kick rather than being a puncheur à la Gilbert. If anything I'd say he's a pure climber who's been able to apply that skill to short, punchy finishes rather than a puncheur per se.

 

[The Hitch]

Pure climbers in the current péloton, for my money:

Domenico Pozzovivo
Igor Antón
José Rujano
Emanuele Sella
Sergio Pardilla
Joaquím Rodríguez
Przemysław Niemiec
Mikel Nieve
Sylwia Kapusta
David Arroyo
Sylwester Szmyd
David Moncoutié
Mara Abbott
John Gadret (sort of)
André Cardoso

Why not Frank Schleck?

 

[hfer07]

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?

he's primarily a TT'er than a consummate Climber-BUT I can argue that when I watch the 95 World's road in marvel on how impeccably he managed Pantani & the other climbers -almost as equal in ability

 

[DenisMenchov]

Why not Frank Schleck?

He is a TT specialist for the likes of Moncutie and Rodriguez.

 

[Magnus]

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.

You could argue that the 3rd place in '98 was a freak result because almost half the field had abandoned the race, but still, he was only 2'35" down on Ullrich. For comparison Ekimov was 3'48" down in that TT.

But the idea that someone is not a pure climber because they are good at something else is a misunderstanding imo. Imo a pure climber is a rider that gains his victory from his ability to climb (edit: in the 'big' mountains).

 

[Froome19]

You could argue that the 3rd place in '98 was a freak result because almost half the field had abandoned the race, but still, he was only 2'35" down on Ullrich. For comparison Ekimov was 3'48" down in that TT.

But the idea that someone is not a pure climber because they are good at something else is a misunderstanding imo. Imo a pure climber is a rider that gains his victory from his ability to climb (edit: in the 'big' mountains).

Yet in such a cicumstance they wouldn't be a pure climber would they, for they Time trial and downhill etc. Indeed they could be classed as a climber but certainly not as a pure climber.
This is as pure effectively means not mixed (according to dictionary) so they would only have to be able to have the ability to climb but nothing else
Therefore Contador may win the tour in the mountains over evans yet still can not be considered a pure climber.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Why not Frank Schleck?

I'd argue that in comparison even to Rodríguez, whose inclusion has been disputed by El Pistolet, Fränk is a hilly guy.

But in truth, I kind of forgot about him when drawing up the list.

 

[movingtarget]

He is a TT specialist for the likes of Moncutie and Rodriguez.

Those two must really loathe time trials. They would look more at home banging elbows with Greipel and Cavendish.

 

[Duartista]

You could argue that the 3rd place in '98 was a freak result because almost half the field had abandoned the race, but still, he was only 2'35" down on Ullrich. For comparison Ekimov was 3'48" down in that TT.

But the idea that someone is not a pure climber because they are good at something else is a misunderstanding imo. Imo a pure climber is a rider that gains his victory from his ability to climb (edit: in the 'big' mountains).

Quite a few pure climbers have been good descenders, i'll give you that (eg Arroyo, Pantani, Virenque). But if they are also good time trialists/rouleurs, then they become rather impure

 

[Magnus]

Yet in such a cicumstance they wouldn't be a pure climber would they, for they Time trial and downhill etc. Indeed they could be classed as a climber but certainly not as a pure climber.
This is as pure effectively means not mixed (according to dictionary) so they would only have to be able to have the ability to climb but nothing else
Therefore Contador may win the tour in the mountains over evans yet still can not be considered a pure climber.

I guess it's partly down to language. I interpret pure as puristic in the sense of remaining 'true to the essence'.

I don't think it makes much sense to define something by what it is not.

To me the ability to climb is defining not the disability to descent or time trial or ride in a group or sprint. I don't think Pantani is a less pure climber for coming third in the final tt of the '98 TdF. I don't think that Michael Rasmussen is a less pure climber for coming in 11th in the first tt in the '07 TdF. But of course, riders who besides being good climbers also are good at tt'ing or sprinting will often achieve results by means of their sprinting or tt'ing abilities. In my book such riders (Valverde for instance) are not pure climbers. But they are so (non-pure climbers) because their sprinting and tt'ing abilities affect the way they race and the results they get, not because they also have the ability to sprint or tt.

Personally I, for instance, don't consider Rodriguez or Moncoutie as pure climbers. Rodriguez I consider more as an uphill-sprinter and Moncoutie I consider more as a baroudeur.

 

[Magnus]

Quite a few pure climbers have been good descenders, i'll give you that (eg Arroyo, Pantani, Virenque). But if they are also good time trialists/rouleurs, then they become rather impure

And the pure climbers that has won TdF has also tt'ed rather well when they won. Besides the already mentioned I think it's fair to also consider Van Impe as pure climber and maybe even Sastre (must admit that I'm a bit hesitant classifying Sastre as a pure climber, don't know why).

 

[Fetisoff]

Personally I, for instance, don't consider Rodriguez or Moncoutie as pure climbers. Rodriguez I consider more as an uphill-sprinter and Moncoutie I consider more as a baroudeur.

J-Rod was third on AngryLou in 08 and Bola Del Mundo in 2010. Hardly uphill sprints those two. Him having bad days in high mountains does not make him a non-climber.

Regardless, wasn't this topic more about the re-surging of the Moncouties and the DeLaFuentes - people who would "recklessly" attack on the first mountain of the day, knowing there are still two HC climbs on the day, knowing that this move will destroy their chances for the GC, but rather go for the TV-time/polka dot glory, and not whether Valverde is a sprinter who can climb or a climber who can sprint???

 

[Magnus]

J-Rod was third on AngryLou in 08 and Bola Del Mundo in 2010. Hardly uphill sprints those two. Him having bad days in high mountains does not make him a non-climber.

Regardless, wasn't this topic more about the re-surging of the Moncouties and the DeLaFuentes - people who would "recklessly" attack on the first mountain of the day, knowing there are still two HC climbs on the day, knowing that this move will destroy their chances for the GC, but rather go for the TV-time/polka dot glory, and not whether Valverde is a sprinter who can climb or a climber who can sprint???

He's definitely a climber, but I don't think he's a pure climber. His uphill-sprint abilities is equally of not more defining for him as a rider compared to his abilities in the high mountains.

And since when was KOM-jerseys an indication of being a pure climber?

 

[El Pistolero]

I'd argue that in comparison even to Rodríguez, whose inclusion has been disputed by El Pistolet, Fränk is a hilly guy.

But in truth, I kind of forgot about him when drawing up the list.

Frank was first a hilly guy and later became a guy for the climbs. He lacks a sprint up the Cauberg like Rodriguez. Yes, he has won AGR, but he attacked before the final hill. Tbh, I don't see Rodriguez as a particular good climber, so that's why I'm hesitating to call him pure. His climbing skills are limited to steep pitches.

 

[Fetisoff]

Tbh, I don't see Rodriguez as a particular good climber, so that's why I'm hesitating to call him pure. His climbing skills are limited to steep pitches.

La Toussuire is not what I'd call a particularly steep climb, and J-Rod did OK there last year....

Yeah, I know, i know... It was just Dauphine Libere....... I'll just shut up now...

 

[El Pistolero]

La Toussuire is not what I'd call a particularly steep climb, and J-Rod did OK there last year....

Yeah, I know, i know... It was just Dauphine Libere....... I'll just shut up now...

On a good day he can handle those climbs, but how many times did we see him "fail" this year in GTs on not so hard climbs? He got his best form at the Dauphiné though, fail for him

 

[Fetisoff]

On a good day he can handle those climbs, but how many times did we see him "fail" this year in GTs on not so hard climbs? He got his best form at the Dauphiné though, fail for him

True. His fail rate is definitely higher than most you'd consider climbers. And not just last year....

As for the form, I will hope that it was his early season injury last year that screwed up his form.

 

[Duartista]

He's definitely a climber, but I don't think he's a pure climber. His uphill-sprint abilities is equally of not more defining for him as a rider compared to his abilities in the high mountains.

And since when was KOM-jerseys an indication of being a pure climber?

I would say that since when haven't KOM jerseys been an indication of being a pure climber would be the better question - perhaps since Jalabert's victories in the TDF? It was after all designed to give the kind of rider we are talking about sonething to aim for, in the days before MTFs. I think that is what the thread was originally about - is there a chance of really good pure climbers going for the KOM again, rather than say finishing 7th on GC?