• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

The worst rider to ever win a Monument in modern times.

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

markene2 said:
Bardamu said:
manolo57 said:
Bardamu said:
I'll put Iglinsky in the list as well.

Iglinsky was really strong when he won LBL. But we all know the truth...
Yep, he was strong that race. Not that strong besides that time.

******, if you acutally followed him you would know that Iglinskiys weakness was his incosistency. He was Contadors last helper in 2008, he was 9th in Romandie, 4th in Tirreno Adriatico, 8th in Milan Sanremo, 8th in Ronde Van Vlaandren, 3rd in E3. He has won Strade Bianchie and also has a 2nd from the race.

When Iglinskiy was on form he was good.
But never as strong as when he outclassed Nibali on the long road to Ans.
 
Re: Re:

Bardamu said:
Billie said:
Ramira said:
Billie said:
Can't believe people named Devolder and Wesemann :eek:

Yeah Wesemann seems incredibly underrated. Apart from his win in RvV he was on the Podium twice in PR, once in AGR and once in GW. Sure he wasn't an inevitable winnner like Boonen or Cancellara, but he was a very good rider.

Oddly enough Devolder might be a better (though still ridiculous) shout. As apart from his victory his best result in a classic was a 7th in PR (his only other top 10 in a true classic). But even though he won because people were marking Boonen, his effort was incredibly powerful both times, a very deserving winner. Though a bit of a flash in the pan.


Devolder also won Belgian NC 3X, got third in Suisse, TOP 10'd a GT and regularly won stage races. Don't like him but absolutely do not understand why he would even be named here...
Never top 10'd a GT and only won third race stage races. National championships are always a bit strange, so I think it is difficult to rate them. Outside his 2 monuments Devolder hasn't done anything special (a valuable domestique though).


He finished 10th in the 2006 Vuelta after Tom Danielson got his 6th place stripped. So technically he got a top 10. Though it's not that impressive. And was his only decent result in a GC (next best was 24th and beside that he never even finished top 75).

I think his main problem was that he was quite good but not great in a lot of disciplines, so he was never able or willing to focus enough on one thing to be truly successful outside of his two RvV victories.
 
Re: Re:

Bardamu said:
Ramira said:
El Pistolero said:
Gerrans won the GP de Québec (2012, 2014), GP de Montreal (2014), GP Quest-France (2009), 2 Tour stages, one Giro stage and one Vuelta stage. He also won two different Monuments.

He is A LOT better than Stijn Devolder imo. He also won the Tour Down Under four times, and even though it's a **** race, it's still WT.

The thing is those races were all against a devalued start list, and most in a small group sprint. I'm not so sure they're more impressive than the 3 NC won by Devolder. After all he had to beat the likes of Gilbert, van Avermaet and Boonen.

I'll grant you Gerrans was a better rider, never denied that. But I don't think it's by all that much. Devolder simply wasn't a rider suited for many wins. As I said before he was a time trialist and baroudeur. And his monument wins were in more impressive fashion than those of Gerrans.

Edit: And to be clear, this is obviously purely personal opinion. The two of them are such different riders it's impossible to compare them objectively, as it depends so much on what you consider to be important to make someone a great rider.

I have to admit I'm quite partial to riders of the Devolder type (though I'm not a fan of him in particular), so I'm probably biased.
Winning in small group sprints suddenly makes it less impressive? Let's cross off 90% of Boonens victories in that case.

Winning in a group of 10+ in a weak field like he did twice in 2014 isn't that much more impressive than winning the Belgian NC in my opinion, no. The simple fact is the Canadian WT races aren't heavily contested, I mean they're at the same time as the Vuelta. That's what I lead with, a devalued field, the small group sprint was more of an addition. Winning a small group sprint against a weak field isn't that impressive (especially since most sprinters that are actually racing are in the Vuelta), if he had destroyed them all by a minute or so, or even had more than 5 seconds to the number 10 in any of them it would have been a different story. Let's put it this way, if Sagan had rode in any of those races (apart from 2009 for obvious reasons) would Gerrans have won any of them? I doubt it.

Boonen won his small group sprints against the likes of a top form Cancellara, after dropping everyone else. Not to mention he won the 2012 PR by a minute and a half on everyone else, something Gerrans couldn't even conceive of, he won in 2009 by 47 seconds. 2005 RvV by 35. So that's 3 of his 7 monuments. And the others were all won from a group of 3 or with one more cyclist, on top form, who was one of the best there was in the discipline. Simply no comparison.
 
Re: Re:

Ramira said:
Bardamu said:
Ramira said:
El Pistolero said:
Gerrans won the GP de Québec (2012, 2014), GP de Montreal (2014), GP Quest-France (2009), 2 Tour stages, one Giro stage and one Vuelta stage. He also won two different Monuments.

He is A LOT better than Stijn Devolder imo. He also won the Tour Down Under four times, and even though it's a **** race, it's still WT.

The thing is those races were all against a devalued start list, and most in a small group sprint. I'm not so sure they're more impressive than the 3 NC won by Devolder. After all he had to beat the likes of Gilbert, van Avermaet and Boonen.

I'll grant you Gerrans was a better rider, never denied that. But I don't think it's by all that much. Devolder simply wasn't a rider suited for many wins. As I said before he was a time trialist and baroudeur. And his monument wins were in more impressive fashion than those of Gerrans.

Edit: And to be clear, this is obviously purely personal opinion. The two of them are such different riders it's impossible to compare them objectively, as it depends so much on what you consider to be important to make someone a great rider.

I have to admit I'm quite partial to riders of the Devolder type (though I'm not a fan of him in particular), so I'm probably biased.
Winning in small group sprints suddenly makes it less impressive? Let's cross off 90% of Boonens victories in that case.

Winning in a group of 10+ in a weak field like he did twice in 2014 isn't that much more impressive than winning the Belgian NC in my opinion, no. The simple fact is the Canadian WT races aren't heavily contested, I mean they're at the same time as the Vuelta. That's what I lead with, a devalued field, the small group sprint was more of an addition. Winning a small group sprint against a weak field isn't that impressive (especially since most sprinters that are actually racing are in the Vuelta), if he had destroyed them all by a minute or so, or even had more than 5 seconds to the number 10 in any of them it would have been a different story. Let's put it this way, if Sagan had rode in any of those races (apart from 2009 for obvious reasons) would Gerrans have won any of them? I doubt it.

Boonen won his small group sprints against the likes of a top form Cancellara, after dropping everyone else. Not to mention he won the 2012 PR by a minute and a half on everyone else, something Gerrans couldn't even conceive of, he won in 2009 by 47 seconds. 2005 RvV by 35. So that's 3 of his 7 monuments. And the others were all won from a group of 3 or with one more cyclist, on top form, who was one of the best there was in the discipline. Simply no comparison.
Wasn't really comparising Boonen and Gerrans, just didn't like the argument that small group sprints should not be rated, because Boonen with notable exceptions, has won most of his races in sprints.

The 2014 victories of Gerrans had quite a good playing field though, from Liege to Montreal and Quebec.
(I'm not a fan of Gerrans and the way he races, but his victories are in his way impressive)
 
My point was more that there's not enough there to say he was a LOT better than Devolder. I think his victories do rate him as a more successful rider than Devolder was. But they just don't rate close enough to winning a Monument, or that much better than winning the Belgian NC to discard Devolder in comparison.
 
Re: Re:

Jakub said:
Good idea! But I can't pick only one.

Demare!
Then Nibali (should have gotten 2 years ban for his Vuelta performance) and Poels.
Bobrik, Jalabert, Rodriguez, Di Luca!, Kristoff, Gerrans, Cipollini, Iglinskij, Berzin, Vinokourov!!!

If I should pick one then Vinokourov.
This list is a joke right? I'm okay with Demare although I find it nonsensical since the guy is still very young and will probably win a lot more in the future. I also find it nonsensical to say Nibali should have gotten a 2 year ban because of a sticky bottle but okay thats your opinion. But what I really don't understand are riders like Jalabert, Rodriguez, Di Luca, Kristoff, Gerrans, Cipollini and Vino.
Generally I think anyone who has at least won 2 monuments or/and a gt has absolutely nothing to do on this list. Maybe some of them are there because of clinical reasons but in that case the list belongs into another forum section.
 
Gerrans only gets mentioned because lots of people don't count being smart as much as being strong. Which I don't personally agree with. I have a certain admiration for the guy who wins by being ruthless and clever rather than by having the best legs, Gerrans, Costa etc. Also, because an important race won by Gerrans was almost certainly a boring race, because he won't be at the sharp end of a fast, exciting race, so lots of fans resent him, as if he was responsible for those races being boring.

Gerrans is better than Devolder by a margin (and is obviously miles better than any of the contenders for worst recent single monument winner, like Zaugg).
 
There really isn't that much to debate on this thread. The original question has an obvious answer, Zaugg. The later question about double monument winners has an obvious answer, Devolder. It isn't close in either category, although there are at least a few other slightly random single monument winners to compare Zaugg with. Devolder, who I like, has no competition at all.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
5
0
Visit site
Re:

Zinoviev Letter said:
There really isn't that much to debate on this thread. The original question has an obvious answer, Zaugg. The later question about double monument winners has an obvious answer, Devolder. It isn't close in either category, although there are at least a few other slightly random single monument winners to compare Zaugg with. Devolder, who I like, has no competition at all.

I'm not that familiar with cycling in the '80s and the '90, so there might have been a more obscure winner than Zaugg.
 
Re: Re:

El Pistolero said:
Zinoviev Letter said:
There really isn't that much to debate on this thread. The original question has an obvious answer, Zaugg. The later question about double monument winners has an obvious answer, Devolder. It isn't close in either category, although there are at least a few other slightly random single monument winners to compare Zaugg with. Devolder, who I like, has no competition at all.

I'm not that familiar with cycling in the '80s and the '90, so there might have been a more obscure winner than Zaugg.

Surely 80's isn't modern in cycling terms.
 
Every topic should have multiple threads! :rolleyes:

Since you said that you started this thread because you were bored, you should have searched a little to find the thread that was already up discussing this topic.

El Pisto informed me that he shouldn't have to look for an existing thread before he posts his duplicate.
 

TRENDING THREADS