Top 10 Cyclists from your country of all time

[abbaskip]

I am from the United States so here is my list (its going to be a little rough since I am not great on my cycling history)

1. Lance Armstrong
2. Greg Lemond
3. Andrew Hampsten
4. Levi Leipheimer
5. Christian Vande Velde
6. George Mount
7. Bobby Julrich
8. George Hincapie
9. David Zabriskie
10. Davis Phinney

Unhonorable Mention
1. Floyd Landis
2. Tyler Hamilton
3. Scott Moninger

Hehe, funny to see this opening post now. Poor Flandis and Tyler cop un (dis?)honourable mentions, but Lance, Levi, CVV, Julich, Hincapie and Zabriskie get off scot free!?

 

[il_fiammingo]

While most scoring systems used in rating riders like this tend to oversell the GTs, I think by rating Paris-Nice the same as the Vuelta and by rating the Classics higher as well (plus with Paris-Nice giving 9 points and País Vasco only 2, the same as the Giro del Friuli or Overijse) you're overcompensating the other way.

Also, because points go for rankings, then somebody who got a number of placements without ever really threatening a win over several years could easily wind up rating higher than somebody like a José Manuel Fuente who shone really brightly but whose peak was pretty short. Your ranking gives too much reward for the guys who make up the bunch coming in behind the solo winner or winner's group. I appreciate you love yourself some Classic one-day racing, but coming 4th in the Trofeo Laigueglia or 9th in Züri-Metzgete should not be giving as many points as 2nd in Amstel Gold or 2nd in the Volta a Catalunya, at least back then.

Also, until recently with the UCI points system, placements were pretty irrelevant, especially in one-day races, so there were few people who would ride for the 9th and 10th places that get them some nice bags of points for this ranking. It also prejudices the list in favour of longevity, so a guy like Joop Zoetemelk, legendary though he was, is liable to be elevated simply because he was around long enough to accumulate a larger palmarès than many.

IMO the baseline of a point system should be: 2 monuments = 1 TDF.
Reason: the best one day specialist often wins 2 classics a year. The best stage rider normally wins the TDF.

 

[Echoes]

About the baseline for my system.

Here below my system for the 1990-2012 part:

A: Winner: 20pts 2nd to 5th: 8 6th to 10th: 6 11th to 15th: 4 16th to 20: 3 21st to 30th: 2

Tour of France 1990-…
*3pts for Stage wins; Mountain: 1st: 3; 2nd and 3rd: 1

B Winner: 16 2nd to 5th: 7 6th to 10th: 4 11th to 15th: 3 16th to 25th: 2

Tour of Italy 1990-…
Tour of Spain 1990-…
*2pts for Stage win; 1pt for Mountains


D Winner: 12 2nd to 5th: 5 6th to 10th: 3 11th to 20th: 2

Paris-Roubaix 1948-…

E Winner: 10 2nd to 5th: 4 6th to 15th: 2

Milan-Sanremo 1990-…
Tour of Lombardy 1990-…
Liège-Bastogne-Liège 1990-…

F Winner: 9 2nd to 5th: 4 6th to 15th: 2

Paris-Nice 1990-…
Tour of Flanders 1990-…
World Championship 1990-…

H Winner: 6 2nd to 10th: 2

Paris-Tours 1990-…
Amstel Gold Race 2003-…
Ghent-Wevelgem 1990-…
Walloon Arrow 1990-…
Olympic Road Race 1996-…

I Winner: 4 2nd to 5th: 2 6th to 10th: 1

Tour of Switzerland 1990-…
Dauphiné libéré 1990-…
Tour of Romandy 1990-…

J Winner: 3 2nd to 10th: 1

Amstel Gold Race 1990-2002
Championship of Zurich 1990-2006
Midi-Libre 1990-2002
Tirreno-Adriatico 1990-…
Ghent-Ghent Circuit (Het Volk/Nieuwblad) 1990-…
World Championship Cyclocross 1990-…
ITT World Championship 1994-…
ITT Olympic Event 1996-…

Winner: 2 2nd to 10th: 1

Tour of the Basque Country 1990-…
Catalan Week 1990-2005
Clasica San Sebastian 1990-…
Milan-Turin 1990-…
Tour of Emily 1990-…
Harelbeke/E3 GP 1990-…
Tour of Andalucia 1990-…
Tour of Belgium 1990-…
Three Varesine Valleys 1990-…
Tour of Lazio 1990-…
Hamburg Cyclassic 1998-…
Tour of Luxembourg 1990-…
Tour of California 2006-…
Tour of Oman 2010-…
Four Days of Dunkirk 1990-…
Tour of Haut-Var 1990-…
Laigueglia Trophy 1990-…
Americas GP 1990-1992
Wincanton/Leeds/Rochester Classic 1990-1997
Lunel GP 1991
Montreal GP 2010-…
Quebec GP 2010-…
Tour of Beijing 2011-…
Tour of Poland 2005-…
Tour of Germany 2005-2008
International Criterium 1990-…
Brabant Arrow 1990-…
Track World Championships or Olympics 1990-…
MTB Olympics or World Championships 1990-...
Nation GP 1990-2004
Baracchi Trophy 1990-1991
Tour of Emily 1990-…
Tour of the Netherlands/Low Countries 1990-…
Tour of the Basque Country 1990-…
Tour of Catalunya 1990-…
Mediterranean Tour 1990-…
Tour of Piedmont 1990-…
Dunkirk 1990-…

 

[LaFlorecita]

About the baseline for my system.

Winner: 2 2nd to 10th: 1

Tour of the Basque Country 1990-…
Tour of Luxembourg 1990-…
Tour of Germany 2005-2008
Tour of the Netherlands/Low Countries 1990-…
Mediterranean Tour 1990-…
[/SIZE]

No. Just no.

 

[Descender]

The winner of the Ruta del Sol gets the same points as the winner of the Basque country? Lol.

 

[The Hitch]

If your willing to provide us with a laugh show us the workings out of how Haimar Zubeldia gets ahead of Vino.

 

[Sylvester]

Twentieth place in Paris - Roubaix > second place in the Tour of the Basque Country

Winning the Tour of the Basque Country = 10th place in Paris - Tours

5th in Milan - Sanremo = 6th in the Giro >>> winning the ITT Worlds

I'd say anything is possible.

 

[happytramp]

Thank you this more respectful criticism (compared to the previous ones).

I would say it all depends on the system. I, myself was rather surprised by many results. But you can easily fiddle with it and make one rider pass the other.

I'd just say that the point classifications in GT's do not count for me. The reason being that I already count stage wins and I didn't want to give twice a reward for the same performance.

With regards to Coppi, he's penalized by his era. I had to downgrade the Italian races up until the 50's, approximately. They were an all-Italian affair, with a depleted field.

Kelly, TT World champion? When?

Firstly, fair play for all the effort you've put in.

Sorry I said TT world championship because I couldn't think of the Grand Prix des Nations at the time. (effectively the same thing i believe, right?)

 

[Libertine Seguros]

While your impassioned defences of the history of Paris-Nice and Milan-San Remo do not go unheard, suggesting that in the last 22 years Paris-Nice has been worth five times as much as País Vasco and three times as much as the Tour de Suisse is delusional. And to suggest that Oman, a pre-season tune-up with one relevant GC stage, and even then that only after the first edition, is on the same level as País Vasco, is pure craziness that is an insult. País Vasco, one of the toughest and most beloved short Tours with passionate support and an illustrious history, is no more important than a three year race in the desert in front of no fans and which doesn't even have live coverage?

As I said, I see two very severe flaws in the ranking system.

1) it is heavily weighted towards Classics, when, as one-day races, it is easier to accumulate a palmarès of them since you could race a large number of them in the time it takes to accumulate the points for one stage race;
2) it puts a high value on placings, which will result in a large number of people who had little effect on races accumulating good points by being able to place 2nd in the sprint for 8th place at, say, Gent-Wevelgem or the Ronde, and also means that longevity comes with a higher value than victories. In the case of a guy like Zoetemelk, they're guys that deserve to be at the business end of any ranking, but you'll find guys who never won a major classic but came 4th in a bunch of semi-classics suddenly appear higher in the listings than people who burnt very brightly but not for very long, e.g. Fuente, but the latter will be far more memorable in the history of the sport.

In 25 years, Nick Nuyens will be better known (for reasons other than Lance Armstrong at least) than George Hincapie, because Nuyens won de Ronde. Hincapie, however, was accumulating placements for a longer period of time whilst sticking to his patented "wait-for-the-race-to-develop" approach, and will still rank higher in this list.

 

[Jakob747]

Bálint Szeghalmi, yepp!, forgot him, but no class as Bodrogi

just look at this list:
Hungaryan TT CH:
1996. Bodrogi László AC Bisontine
1997. Bodrogi László AC Bisontine
1998. Bodrogi László VC Lyon-V.V
1999. Víg Aurél Compensario Cuoio
2000. Bodrogi László Mapei Quick Step
2001. Bodrogi László Mapei Quick Step
2002. Bodrogi László Mapei Quick Step
2003. Bodrogi László Quick Step Davitamon
2004. Bodrogi László Quick Step Davitamon
2005. Szekeres Csaba P Nivó Betonexpressz 2000 Kft SE
2006. Bodrogi László Credit Agricole
2007. Bodrogi László Credit Agricole
2008. Bodrogi László Credit Agricole

"It's a shame that Hungary doesn't have that level of cycling history, and quite strange"

I remember hyping Balazs Rothmer at the start of the new millennium. He had a much broader rider-repertoire than L. Bodrogi.

If my memory serves me correct he finished 12th at the 2001 Baby-Giro. I remember he went well on the mountain stage to Prato di Campoli won by Emil Arnel.

Too bad he didn't turn out all that great in the end though! Still decent rider.

 

[Echoes]

Firstly, fair play for all the effort you've put in.

Sorry I said TT world championship because I couldn't think of the Grand Prix des Nations at the time. (effectively the same thing i believe, right?)

OK. Thank you too. I did think you meant the Nations GP. Yes, it was some sort of an ITT Worlds. I rated it rather high.

While your impassioned defences of the history of Paris-Nice and Milan-San Remo do not go unheard, suggesting that in the last 22 years Paris-Nice has been worth five times as much as Pa&#237]

So I owe you an explanation about the Basque Country ...

This was a system that I made up around 2006/7, I don't remember exactly but when the Basque Country was not such a big event. It had just been promoted by the ProTour (at that time) and was still a 5-day race with very short stages. And I did not feel like re-adjusting afterwards. Perhaps I should place it in the above category with Tirreno (since 2005 and the PT, right) but I think that overall it would not change much because I first value consistency. A rider winning one race here or there does not really impress me. But OK I should do it. However I added new races like Oman precisely because it's a pre-season tune-up, that the best current riders race and it shows who are really willing to race a whole season on top (Gesink, Nibali, etc.). And it has two relevant GC stages (Mountain + TT)

1) it is heavily weighted towards Classics, when, as one-day races, it is easier to accumulate a palmar&#232]

My ratio France/Classic is more or less 0.5 depending on the classic. I think it's fair. As mentioned above, you can hardly win two classics in a year, only the best can do it. They're all so different. With different top contenders for the win.

2) it puts a high value on placings, which will result in a large number of people who had little effect on races accumulating good points by being able to place 2nd in the sprint for 8th place at, say, Gent-Wevelgem or the Ronde, and also means that longevity comes with a higher value than victories. In the case of a guy like Zoetemelk, they're guys that deserve to be at the business end of any ranking, but you'll find guys who never won a major classic but came 4th in a bunch of semi-classics suddenly appear higher in the listings than people who burnt very brightly but not for very long, e.g. Fuente, but the latter will be far more memorable in the history of the sport.

I feel strongly about this.

Zoetemelk might've been a wheelsucker behind Merckx but 18 years of top cycle racing is amazing and he should be credited for this. On top of that, he raced each season from February to October, which appeals to me. Are they less memorable than one-hit wonders? I don't think so. The more a rider is racing, the more people see him and he leaves a trace in the collective memory.

One-hit wonders? I usually forget about them.

In 25 years, Nick Nuyens will be better known [...] than George Hincapie, because Nuyens won de Ronde. Hincapie, however, was accumulating placements for a longer period of time whilst sticking to his patented "wait-for-the-race-to-develop" approach, and will still rank higher in this list.

Nuyens is also a "wait-for-the-race-to-develop" guy. You put a lot of pressure on my system. A point system cannot take "style" into account. Many riders had a very aggressive style and always lost, while a rider like Nuyens precisely won by drafting others' wheels.

He would be remembered only by those who care to look up the Tour of Flanders palmares, while we who had seen him live may forget about him.

If I ask my dad if he remembers Cees Bal or Johan Lammerts he would say no. But Frans Verbeeck, he definitely remembers him.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

So I owe you an explanation about the Basque Country ...

This was a system that I made up around 2006/7, I don't remember exactly but when the Basque Country was not such a big event. It had just been promoted by the ProTour (at that time) and was still a 5-day race with very short stages. And I did not feel like re-adjusting afterwards. Perhaps I should place it in the above category with Tirreno (since 2005 and the PT, right) but I think that overall it would not change much because I first value consistency. A rider winning one race here or there does not really impress me. But OK I should do it. However I added new races like Oman precisely because it's a pre-season tune-up, that the best current riders race and it shows who are really willing to race a whole season on top (Gesink, Nibali, etc.). And it has two relevant GC stages (Mountain + TT)

Which is fewer than País Vasco and also with a weaker field and not World Tour. You're not going to find a way to justify how low País Vasco is ranked compared to some semi-classics that draw some very average fields now.

My ratio France/Classic is more or less 0.5 depending on the classic. I think it's fair. As mentioned above, you can hardly win two classics in a year, only the best can do it. They're all so different. With different top contenders for the win.

That's the Tour de France - i.e. one stage race - vs. any number of Classics. You're rating Milan-San Remo higher than the Vuelta. While that is understandable at some points in time, in the post-Zabel era it's ludicrous. Your rating of races appears highly subjective, a bit like if I gave bonus points for winning the Subida a Urkiola and removed points for setting foot in the Scheldeprijs.

I feel strongly about this.

Zoetemelk might've been a wheelsucker behind Merckx but 18 years of top cycle racing is amazing and he should be credited for this. On top of that, he raced each season from February to October, which appeals to me. Are they less memorable than one-hit wonders? I don't think so. The more a rider is racing, the more people see him and he leaves a trace in the collective memory.

Hence why I said Zoetemelk would be at the business end of any ranking, but other people in the list find their position artificially inflated by being there-or-thereabouts in a number of races. Tadej Valjavec was coming in the lower end of the top 10 of GTs for years, but he'll be forgotten long before Juanjo Cobo, cos Cobo won the Vuelta.

One-hit wonders? I usually forget about them.

But the guys I was specifically referring to as having been shafted due to short careers in comparison to some long-forgotten classics guys who came 7th in a bunch of races in the 60s, were José Manuel Fuente and Lucho Herrera. They're not one-hit wonders. Santiago Pérez or Aitor González, those are one-hit wonders.

Nuyens is also a "wait-for-the-race-to-develop" guy. You put a lot of pressure on my system. A point system cannot take "style" into account. Many riders had a very aggressive style and always lost, while a rider like Nuyens precisely won by drafting others' wheels.

He would be remembered only by those who care to look up the Tour of Flanders palmares, while we who had seen him live may forget about him.

If I ask my dad if he remembers Cees Bal or Johan Lammerts he would say no. But Frans Verbeeck, he definitely remembers him.

But you're then arguing against your own system's inflation of the winner's points. I'd also say that giving the same points for 2nd down to 10th in some races is frankly preposterous as well, especially in classics like Milan-San Remo that wind up going to bunch sprints, or you end up with a bunch coming in together after the winning move (see the sprint for 2nd behind Devolder at the Ronde a few years ago). In the years before the UCI points system, these placings were worth little once you got past the podium, apart from a bit of prize money, so they wouldn't be so keenly fought out. You can make the top 10 of a bunch of stage races by never being seen (hey, that's what Valjavec did). Those guys will get forgotten more quickly than somebody like, say Voeckler. Quick - who was 10th at the Vuelta last year? At Milan-San Remo? At Amstel Gold? Being forgettable for a number of years, or being remembered just as an afterthought because your name has been around a while, should not value a rider higher than somebody who actually won things of value - and with this I mean races that are high in value, not just the ones that you happen to like.

 

[Echoes]

Which is fewer than País Vasco and also with a weaker field and not World Tour. You're not going to find a way to justify how low País Vasco is ranked compared to some semi-classics that draw some very average fields now.

Okayyyyyyyy I'll upgrade Pais Vasco for next time.

And I give 1pt more for the winner, Sanchez is still ahead of Contadull, which for me is justice, though by the end of 2013, it'll no longer be the case, unfortunately.

And I don't touch these Italian semis...

You're rating Milan-San Remo higher than the Vuelta.

Next time you'll read more carefully.

Hence why I said Zoetemelk would be at the business end of any ranking, but other people in the list find their position artificially inflated by being there-or-thereabouts in a number of races. Tadej Valjavec was coming in the lower end of the top 10 of GTs for years, but he'll be forgotten long before Juanjo Cobo, cos Cobo won the Vuelta.

No way. The hell with one-hit wonders. Being there-or-thereabouts in a number of races is their own merits !

But the guys I was specifically referring to as having been shafted due to short careers in comparison to some long-forgotten classics guys who came 7th in a bunch of races in the 60s,

Who?

You can remain sarcastic if you want, I know very few cycling "historians" who would rate Herrera and Fuente above Agostinho.

Longevity guys were able adapt their standard to some new generations of riders.

I'd also say that giving the same points for 2nd down to 10th in some races is frankly preposterous as well, especially in classics like Milan-San Remo that wind up going to bunch sprints, or you end up with a bunch coming in together after the winning move (see the sprint for 2nd behind Devolder at the Ronde a few years ago).

Read again !!!

And I don't understand anything at this. First, Milan-Sanremo, then Flanders ??? If there is a bunch together, then obviously, each place is more or less worth the other, so my system makes sense.

In the years before the UCI points system, these placings were worth little once you got past the podium, apart from a bit of prize money, so they wouldn't be so keenly fought out.

They would fight for the win and end up being top10.

I remember Criquielion saying that in 1985, as World Champion he had to get back to Flanders and ended 6th. A staff member of his team would then tell him: "So you are 6th. Then you can win that race. There's no big difference between 6th and 1st." And indeed, two years later, he won that classic.

You can make the top 10 of a bunch of stage races by never being seen (hey, that's what Valjavec did).

It's their own merits. The hell with part-time racers like Contadull, Toolrich or Pharmstrong.

Those guys will get forgotten more quickly than somebody like, say Voeckler. Quick - who was 10th at the Vuelta last year? At Milan-San Remo? At Amstel Gold?

You won't go far with one top10 place in my system either. If you accumulate them, then it appeals to me, yes.

not just the ones that you happen to like.

And next time, I rate Tro Bro Leon = Bore de France, okay?

 

[DirtyWorks]

I am from the United States so here is my list (its going to be a little rough since I am not great on my cycling history)

Considering all but Lemond and Hampsten came up in Verdruggen/Wiesel or Eddie B's system, you should have serious reservations about the way they got their palmares.

Here's a short list in no particular order. I am probably missing some.

-Greg Lemond
-Andy Hampsten
-Major Taylor
-Michael Hiltner whose name changed to Victor Vincente of America. Doped, but quit because of it.
-A couple of generations of Simes'
-Jonathan Page
-Katie Compton (I hope she's not doping)
-Steve Tilford
-Inga Thompson
-John Tomac

Mountain biking as a discipline has a few more that I think would have been great on the road but didn't for whatever reasons.

 

[DirtyWorks]

I am from the United States so here is my list (its going to be a little rough since I am not great on my cycling history)

Considering all but Lemond and Hampsten came up in Wiesel or Eddie B's system, you should have reservations about them.

Here's a short list in no particular order. I am probably missing some.

-Greg Lemond
-Andy Hampsten
-Major Taylor
-Michael Hiltner whose name changed to Victor Vincente of America. Doped, but quit because of it.
-A couple of generations of Simes'
-Jonathan Page
-Katie Compton (I hope she's not doping)
-Steve Tilford
-Inga Thompson
-George Mount

There's a few mountain bikers that didn't cross over to road, but IMHO would have been good there too.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Okayyyyyyyy I'll upgrade Pais Vasco for next time.

And I give 1pt more for the winner, Sanchez is still ahead of Contadull, which for me is justice, though by the end of 2013, it'll no longer be the case, unfortunately.

It's their own merits. The hell with part-time racers like Contadull, Toolrich or Pharmstrong.

This is the problem. If you decide to create an all time ranking you should be objective.

 

[Descender]

You don't understand. Objective reality has a whole different meaning for Echoes.

 

[The Hitch]

Wait contador is dull but Evans is exciting?

Hmm..must have been Evans i saw attacking 100k out on telegraph then. For some reason i always thought it was contador. Silly me.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Wait contador is dull but Evans is exciting?

Hmm..must have been Evans i saw attacking 100k out on telegraph then. For some reason i always thought it was contador. Silly me.

Alberto wasn't even in the race

 

[Red Rick]

Libertine, 10th in the Vuelta last year.... Nieve, (educated yet random guess)

Edit, damn, he didn't compete

 

[iZnoGouD]

-Tiago Machado
-Tiago Machado
-Tiago Machado
-Tiago Machado
-Tiago Machado
-Tiago Machado
-Tiago Machado
-Tiago Machado
-Tiago Machado
-Tiago Machado