Velo d’Or 2023

[RedheadDane]

If you mean my post the answer is he needed his Big 3 one day races and proof he can do More than that. The best cyclist of the year should at least show Some Versatility beyond one day races. If he won all 5 monuments No Problem he's cyclist of the year. But IMO 3 other guys had a better season than he did.

Who? Surely, Vingegaard can't be one of them. After all; the best cyclist of the year should at least show some versatility beyond stage races.
Pogacar, Roglic, and Evenepoel? Or are you considering someone not in the poll?

 

[hender-retour]

Interesting debate.

What requires the most talent, skill, and determination.

Peaking for 3-5 days as MVDP throughout an entire year. But basically having 100% success rate in races where kitchen sinks are thrown around like candy.

Or like Tadej, peaking for 2-3 days throughout the year plus semi-peaks for Nice and a huge peak for TDF getting second when then competition is all doing peaks or close-to.

Vingegaard i think only wins this if winning the Vuelta. He maybe could have - but he did not.

 

[houtdffan]

So you agree then that Alejandro Valverde Belmonte, who finished 5 times on top of each CQ and PCS rankings, should get much more than 1 Velo?

Only wt races should count

 

[barakuda]

Interesting debate.

What requires the most talent, skill, and determination.

Peaking for 3-5 days as MVDP throughout an entire year. But basically having 100% success rate in races where kitchen sinks are thrown around like candy.

Or like Tadej, peaking for 2-3 days throughout the year plus semi-peaks for Nice and a huge peak for TDF getting second when then competition is all doing peaks or close-to.

Vingegaard i think only wins this if winning the Vuelta. He maybe could have - but he did not.

But he didn't basically, he was beaten in RVV, by Pogacar.

 

[Blanco]

Only wt races should count

It's ok then. He won plenty of them. In fact only a few riders won more in the whole cycling history, and none of them in this century.

 

[hender-retour]

But he didn't basically, he was beaten in RVV, by Pogacar.

One miss out of 4 (huge events) is still basically winning everything. However You are of course correct and I think my post also alluded to the conclusion You seem to have reached; that Pogi deserves this one.

 

[hender-retour]

MVDP got the most important wins out of his natural ability he could get. One could argue Taadej overreached a bit and got fewer important wins but still managed to shine and somewhat dominate in more races. MVDP to be a clear winner should have bagged 1-2 TDF stages imo. Sure he used his strengths to help the team in the TDF but that would not have happened if he could win himself with ease.

 

[proffate]

If you mean my post the answer is he needed his Big 3 one day races and proof he can do More than that. The best cyclist of the year should at least show Some Versatility beyond one day races. If he won all 5 monuments No Problem he's cyclist of the year. But IMO 3 other guys had a better season than he did.

I mean he won CX worlds, that seems versatile. And don't tell me off-road doesn't matter, or why did Pidcock get a nomination?

You're over-valuing one specific thing, which is steady state power to weight ratio.

 

[Squire]

A vote, but not a popular one. I believe that it is simply a case of a number of cycling journalists being invited to vote: as far as I am aware, there is no sort of panel discussion involved.

Whether you consider cycling journalists to be clever people only you can answer.

I'd argue that the Velo d'Or award has been pretty spot on most years since it was created, except 2019 and 2009. Even in the Armstrong years it's hard to argue against him, as any other candidates didn't really have that much to bring to the table. Could maybe make a small case for Freire 2004.

It's a bit of a toss-up between the two riders that are being discussed this year for me. Both deserve it.

 

[BigCoward]

If someone said at the start of the season would you rather win the world's, or 2nd in the tour with 2 stages, PN, Catalunya, Fleche, Amstel what would you choose?
I would always go for winning on the biggest stage rather than amazing consistency (which is why I feel Valverde is over rated slightly), but I can accept others may choose the volume.

 

[Berniece]

If someone said at the start of the season would you rather win the world's, or 2nd in the tour with 2 stages, PN, Catalunya, Fleche, Amstel what would you choose?
I would always go for winning on the biggest stage rather than amazing consistency (which is why I feel Valverde is over rated slightly), but I can accept others may choose the volume.

With the idea that the 2 monuments of each cancel each other out? I would go for the WC

 

[bNator]

With the idea that the 2 monuments of each cancel each other out? I would go for the WC

Cancelling each other out is a good idea. I would not go randomly by prestige level though, but try to cover the way something was won as well. For instance WC and Flanders were both spectacular. They cancel each other out. Then we have Lombardia and Sanremo that were also won in similar fashon and have similar levels of prestige and cancel each other out. Then you have Paris-Roubaix on one side and P-N, Fleche Wallone, Amstel Gold and 2nd Tour GC on the other. Tour stage victories as well. I dont't know. It's hard to objectively argue MVdP has had a better season, even if we discount the versatility criteria.

 

[tobydawq]

Cancelling each other out is a good idea. I would not go randomly by prestige level though, but try to cover the way something was won as well. For instance WC and Flanders were both spectacular. They cancel each other out. Then we have Lombardia and Sanremo that were also won in similar fashon and have similar levels of prestige and cancel each other out. Then you have Paris-Roubaix on one side and P-N, Fleche Wallone, Amstel Gold and 2nd Tour GC on the other. Tour stage victories as well. I dont't know. It's hard to objectively argue MVdP has had a better season, even if we discount the versatility criteria.

If 2nd Tour GC counts, then surely 2nd in De Ronde should also count for Van der Poel.

But yes, it's basically a coin flip (ie a popularity contest).

 

[Netserk]

I'd argue that the Velo d'Or award has been pretty spot on most years since it was created, except [...] 2009.

Really? I have no idea who you think deserved it then.

 

[Blanco]

The thing with this ranking of riders in complex a bit.

If we compare them yearly, which is the case now, always someone who won more has a little edge, like Pogacar in this case versus Van Der Poel. I mean 17-6 in wins, 10-3 in WT wins, points heavily in Pogacar's direction, no matter his deficit in biggest wins (2-3). On top of that he was 2nd in the Tour, while Van Der Poel was 2nd De Ronde, arguably a lesser race.

But if we look a little further, in the all-time greats department and discussion, these 3 Van Der Poel's wins carries a little more weight then Pogacar's 2 and all the other stuff. To make an example I would use Sean Kelly. Nobody puts Sean Kelly in the list of "immortals" because of his 7 Paris-Nice wins or 8 more big stage races. It's mainly his monument record that puts him high on that list, then his Vuelta with all GT stages and high placings, and only then his big stage race wins and other classics.

So, I would say it's a really tricky choice.
I'm for Van Der Poel though...

 

[Keldergoat]

Basically, he won 3 days out of the entire season. Granted they were Big one day Races but IMO someone who never showed up on the podium of a GT or won/podiumed a 7 day WT stage race doesn't even consider being eligible.
And I'll forget his season very quickly.

So if I understand you correctly podiuming Tour de Romandie is equal worth a candidacy of a Velo d'Or as winning RvV, PR or WC? That is a, very interesting way of looking at this sport.

 

[gregrowlerson]

If someone said at the start of the season would you rather win the world's, or 2nd in the tour with 2 stages, PN, Catalunya, Fleche, Amstel what would you choose?
I would always go for winning on the biggest stage rather than amazing consistency (which is why I feel Valverde is over rated slightly), but I can accept others may choose the volume.

I thought you were making a (very good) case for Pogacar here!

The more I think about it, the more I think Pogacar. He is almost as good a one day racer as MVDP, and of course is vastly superior in stage racing.

Cyclo Cross stuff probably has to be taken strongly into consideration to get MVDP over the line.

 

[buddy buddy buddy]

so after the karate kid discovery I found out everyone in the rankings top ten are in fact characters from 1980s movies

evenepoel

van aert

van der poel, vingegaard

pogacar

roglic

pedersen

philipsen

yates

hirschi

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Nope, sorry. I see some names and some totally unrelated stills from films.

And some national stereotypes of a kind that I thought had ceased to be considered humourous in the 70s

 

[bNator]

If 2nd Tour GC counts, then surely 2nd in De Ronde should also count for Van der Poel.

But yes, it's basically a coin flip (ie a popularity contest).

I was thinking about that as well, yes. But then I thought, that 2nd in Ronde could almost cancel out with 3rd from WCRR (especially if we consider the extraordinary effort Pog had to invest to achieve the result) and we're back to square one...

I actually don't mind MVdP getting it. He's had a really great season and personally, I really like the guy.... But objectively speaking, IMO it should be either Pog or Vingegaard (which I don't like as much ).

 

[BigCoward]

If 2nd Tour GC counts, then surely 2nd in De Ronde should also count for Van der Poel.

But yes, it's basically a coin flip (ie a popularity contest).

Does 3rd in worlds not just about cancel that out? Difference between 1st and 2nd is vast, 2nd and 3rd not so much (IMO).

Edit ninja'd above.

 

[SHAD0W93]

It's ok then. He won plenty of them. In fact only a few riders won more in the whole cycling history, and none of them in this century.

How many WT wins do you have Valverde counted at? On a quick count I counted 61 for Valverde and 68 for Cav.

Could maybe make a small case for Freire 2004.

It's a bit of a toss-up between the two riders that are being discussed this year for me. Both deserve it.

Cunego’s 2004 > Freire’s 2004 and arguably better than Armstrong’s 2004.
1 GT, 4 GT stages, 1 monument, and 13 total wins vs 1 monument, Worlds, 1 GT stage, and 6 total wins

 

[Blanco]

How many WT wins do you have Valverde counted at? On a quick count I counted 61 for Valverde and 68 for Cav.

Races, not stages...

 

[jono]

MVDP in his big targets for 2023 (chronological order, but probably also in order of importance to him): 1st, 1st, 2nd, 1st, 1st

I can see the case for Pogacar, and understand those who hold a relatively anonymous Tour against him, but if van der Poel ends up winning it would be tough to make too many complaints.

 

[Nick2413]

Sort of unrelated, but shockingly Pogacar only had 3 more race days than MVdP this season.