• 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!

Tour de France Tour de France 2021, Stage 21: Chatou – Paris Champs-Élysées, 108.4 km

Page 7 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Not that he's faster than Cavendish, but imagine there wasn't a Cavendish in the race and the team would ride for Morkov - it would be problematic though that Morkov wouldn't have a Morkov to lead him out.

He is so good he could have done his own leadout, too. And everyone else would just tire themselves out in the fight to get onto his wheel.
 
Not that he's faster than Cavendish, but imagine there wasn't a Cavendish in the race and the team would ride for Morkov - it would be problematic though that Morkov wouldn't have a Morkov to lead him out.
I am. Cav won the first two stages without Quickstep in the last KM. Morkov isn’t doing what Cav did. The third stage was textbook but I think WVA beats him. The 4th stage he of course would have won without Cav or a different sprinter he was leading out.
 
Not really upset, but I dont personally consider Cavendish one of cycling greats regardless. When I think of great riders, its versatile riders than can do lots of stuff and not just put their nose in the wind for the last 200 metres. Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Gilbert, Contador, Armstrong, Ullrich etc. etc. I all consider better riders for sure, and thats just one the top of my head from riders I grew up watching.

I dont understand why you would try compare him to them in that way. It is not a discussion about who is the overall better rider in terms of ability.

I would say that the best sprinter of all time, arguably, belongs in the conversation as a "cycling great".

His palmares speak for itself. His impact on the sport. An icon and legend in his own right.

If he is such a bad rider, he wouldnt have won all these races. He is a champion that has his place in history forever within the sport.
 
I dont understand why you would try compare him to them in that way. It is not a discussion about who is the overall better rider in terms of ability.

I would say that the best sprinter of all time, arguably, belongs in the conversation as a "cycling great".

His palmares speak for itself. His impact on the sport. An icon and legend in his own right.

If he is such a bad rider, he wouldnt have won all these races. He is a champion that has his place in history forever within the sport.
I agree. It is kind of like being the greatest goalkeeper.
 
Cavendish is obviously an all time great. I don't see why that's even debatable. He's not the most exciting in terms of having given us great epic rides or anything, but that's not his job and it's not his fault he comes along at an era when sprinting is so controlled. He's, if not the outright best sprinter of all time, then one of the first names in the discussion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy262