Top five Riders of All Time

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 11, 2009
664
0
0
Belokki said:
perfect all- rounder:Eddy Merckxs even though he was cought doping twice;)
Perfect stage racer:Lance Armstrong

1: Lance Armstrong: 7 Tours, Worlds, Critérium du Dauphiné Libérés,Tour de Suisse,La Flèche Wallonne among others( palmares 107 victories)
(little races don't mean **** compared to the Tour de France!) Pray tell me would you win the Norvegian championship 15 times or win the World Cup of footbal once!? And don't get cute with me that cycing is not footbal, but the difference betwen races is huge!!

2. Eddy Merckx... (why 2nd?: didn't see him race + he was cought doping 2 times;), but he has an outstanding record of over 500 wins that can't be counted out, admire his attacking mentality)

3. Jan Ullrich: A true diesel and a great champion...he would be hailed as one of the greats if not for Lance! He could have taken on the greats of old any day, still has a palmares most would only dream of... a Tour and a Vuelta...

4. Miguel Indurain: 5 Tour in a row and 2 Giro's in modern times is a huge acomplishment, other than that he was the the nicest champion of them all...

5. Alberto Contador in a close battle...: Seems to be a replica of Lance in style and team tactics, only e participates in more stage races other than that of the Tour... Already a has a great palmares with one of each of the Grand Tours among a load of other smaller stage races and could easily move up in my list in time... a future great!
:confused:
Armstrong #1 and #2 Merckx why such sacrilege?

I wouldn't even rank Armstong in the top 10. He gets #1 for best Tour rider but not for Greatest rider of all time. Merckx has 11 GT wins to Armstrongs 7. If we are talking just Tour Merckx also holds the the record for most Tour stage wins and days in yellow plus in in his first Tour Merckx won every jersey and six stages. Let alone being world champion 3 times and 28 victorys in the classics.
 
Mar 11, 2009
267
0
0
titan_90 said:
:confused:
Armstrong #1 and #2 Merckx why such sacrilege?

I wouldn't even rank Armstong in the top 10. He gets #1 for best Tour rider but not for Greatest rider of all time. Merckx has 11 GT wins to Armstrongs 7. If we are talking just Tour Merckx also holds the the record for most Tour stage wins and days in yellow plus in in his first Tour Merckx won every jersey and six stages. Let alone being world champion 3 times and 28 victorys in the classics.


Can't judge Merckx because I did not see him race... Heck I wasn't even born back then... I included him in my list because of his palmares...
 
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
1
0
titan_90 said:
:confused:
Armstrong #1 and #2 Merckx why such sacrilege?

I wouldn't even rank Armstong in the top 10. He gets #1 for best Tour rider but not for Greatest rider of all time. Merckx has 11 GT wins to Armstrongs 7. If we are talking just Tour Merckx also holds the the record for most Tour stage wins and days in yellow plus in in his first Tour Merckx won every jersey and six stages. Let alone being world champion 3 times and 28 victorys in the classics.
The question I asked is not about who is the best everybody knows Merckx is the best all rounder this is about who would win the tour with all the greats in it
 
franciep10 said:
The question I asked is not about who is the best everybody knows Merckx is the best all rounder this is about who would win the tour with all the greats in it
Probably should have started a new thread for that. It could be a bit confusing for people who read the title and skip to the last page w/o reading every post.
 
Mar 11, 2009
664
0
0
franciep10 said:
The question I asked is not about who is the best everybody knows Merckx is the best all rounder this is about who would win the tour with all the greats in it
I didn't see that you asked a new question.

Podium: Eddy Merckx, Lance Armstrong, Bernard Hinault
Sprint: Erik Zabel or Sean Kelly
Mountains: Richard Virenque
Young Rider: ?
 
Mar 11, 2009
3,274
1
0
franciep10 said:
People how about this If you had a tour de france right know with the top riders from the past and now in their prime who would win on modern equipment. Give me your podium, and all the classifications and please no doping talk.
I think giving everybody 1970's equipment is beter. Riders from other times also had some time to get used to it ofcourse :)

Podium: Eddy Merckx, Phillipe Thys, Alfredo Binda
Sprint: Andre Darrigade
Mountain: Federico Bahamontes
Young Rider: Roger Rivière

/edit: maybe i'm over-judging pre-ww2 skills. after '45 it would be 2. Hinault 3. Bobet/Anquetil/Ocana/Lemond
 
Apr 12, 2009
404
0
0
The question is not, which all-time great would win if you had them all race each other in their prime, but which riders would do best under the conditions of different eras.

Merckx's skill-set and mentality were ideal for a period in which you had to race continuously throughout the season. Armstrong's skill set and mentality were ideal for a period in which you can focus on only one race per year. If you brought Merckx forward 30 years, gave him modern equipment and training, and had him race Armstrong at the 2004 Tour, I doubt he'd win -- simply because he was never a pure climber. Conversely, though, I'm not sure that Armstrong would have done so well if he'd tried to race Merckx's 1974 season via old equipment and training. Can you really see him winning on cobbles? Or on a long, drawn-out non-peak of form?
 
franciep10 said:
People how about this If you had a tour de france right know with the top riders from the past and now in their prime who would win on modern equipment. Give me your podium, and all the classifications and please no doping talk.



Podium: Lance Armstrong, Bernard Hinault, Contador
Sprint: Erik Zabel
Mountain: Richard Virenque
Young Rider: I have no clue about this one
Ok, I promiss not to mention doping. But, in doing so, I will have to remove Armstrong form the list. And I still think that, on "bread and water" only (oops, if I inadvertantly refered to doping, it's only because its nearly impossible to talk about a Tour winner since EPO and, at the same time, not talk about doping) and in terms of pure talent: Lemond needs to be there.

1) Merckx 2) Lemond 3) Hinault
 
rhubroma said:
Ok, I promiss not to mention doping. But, in doing so, I will have to remove Armstrong form the list. And I still think that, on "bread and water" only (oops, if I inadvertantly refered to doping, it's only because its nearly impossible to talk about a Tour winner since EPO and, at the same time, not talk about doping) and in terms of pure talent: Lemond needs to be there.

1) Merckx 2) Lemond 3) Hinault
Sorry I said "nearly impossible," when I ment just impossible.
 
Charly Gaul would have to be on any list of climbers. The "Angel of the Mountains" he was called. And for good reason.

Federico Bahamontes is another great name to list.

I'd add José Manuel Fuente to any list of climbing greats from history.

Pantani would be on my list of climbers also, for reasons said before, even though he didn't seek out KOM points.

Virenque does NOT belong at the top of a list of climbers, for reasons listed before.
 
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
1
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Charly Gaul would have to be on any list of climbers. The "Angel of the Mountains" he was called. And for good reason.

Federico Bahamontes is another great name to list.

I'd add José Manuel Fuente to any list of climbing greats from history.

Pantani would be on my list of climbers also, for reasons said before, even though he didn't seek out KOM points.

Virenque does NOT belong at the top of a list of climbers, for reasons listed before.
I shouldn't have to explain myself for virenque he was doped up and he was a classless rider but he won 7 KOM jerseys and in a race of this stature pantani would be going for the overall while vireneque would go for kom points, and not care about the overall. and as i said let's not think about doping with this.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
Charly Gaul would have to be on any list of climbers. The "Angel of the Mountains" he was called. And for good reason.

Federico Bahamontes is another great name to list.

I'd add José Manuel Fuente to any list of climbing greats from history.

Pantani would be on my list of climbers also, for reasons said before, even though he didn't seek out KOM points.

Virenque does NOT belong at the top of a list of climbers, for reasons listed before.
I'd also put Luis Ocana. If he didn't crash one year, Merckx would have won only four, not five, Tours. This guy was someone who even the great Eddy got his arsh kicked by on the climbs...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY