Vincenzo Nibali discussion thread

Page 340 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

damian13ster said:
I agree with him. For a cyclist that already won all GTs, winning a monument is much more impressive than continue amassing Giros and Vueltas.
So Nibali might not be the best rider purely in GTs, but if Boonen classifies him as a GT rider, then he is the best among cyclists classified as GT riders (if you can follow that logic).
I think it is between him and Valverde as best cyclist of this generation, but since Valverde is stained by a clinic ban, I think the title goes to Nibali. If only one of them could win a WC, that would pretty much settle the discussion
Basically 100% agree with this.
 
Aug 4, 2011
3,647
0
0
Re:

Hugo Koblet said:
There are two kinds of forum users: Those who underrate Nibali and those who overrate him.
I am neither. So there is 3rd kind of FU who knows that there are so many things that can go right or wrong in a race that in reality its very difficult to make comparisons.
Nibs is an outstanding rider. His victory's signal him to be one of the best riders around.
I'm still to be convinced of his ability to compete with the likes of Contador, Froome etc in a 3 week race.
He needs a major GT win against these rivals to prove he can win against the very best over a GT.
Nibs though can beat anyone on his day in a stage race.
A great rider one of my favourites but still has a thing prove.
 
So let's have a look.

We have a rider who's won all 3 GTs and a monument against a Contador who's won countless GT but who'll never even win a classic, against a Froome who only won 2 Tours and won't even try in a classic, against a Quintana who only won a Giro and has absolutely zero chances of winning a classic.

What the hell are we even talking about?
 
Re:

Pippo_San said:
So let's have a look.

We have a rider who's won all 3 GTs and a monument against a Contador who's won countless GT but who'll never even win a classic, against a Froome who only won 2 Tours and won't even try in a classic, against a Quintana who only won a Giro and has absolutely zero chances of winning a classic.

What the hell are we even talking about?
Froome and Quintana certainly aren't in this conversation. :)
 
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
1
0
Why not? Froome has won the Tour twice, one more time than Nibali, and against better competition. Whether 1 more Tour and beating a quality field is worth a Giro, a Vuelta and a Lombardia.. hard to say.

But even so, it's a great achievement by Nibali. Winning the Tour and a monument is a rare acomplishment, although I'm starting to think that the very top GT climbers would have a reasonably chance to win Liege and Lombardia in most years, if only they made it a target. Shameful that they don't, but it shows how the Tour trumps everything else by miles.
 
Re:

SeriousSam said:
Why not? Froome has won the Tour twice, one more time than Nibali, and against better competition. Whether 1 more Tour and beating a quality field is worth a Giro, a Vuelta and a Lombardia.. hard to say.

But even so, it's a great achievement by Nibali. Winning the Tour and a monument is a rare acomplishment, although I'm starting to think that the very top GT climbers would have a reasonably chance to win Liege and Lombardia in most years, if only they made it a target. Shameful that they don't, but it shows how the Tour trumps everything else by miles.
Yeah because you are considering Froome or Quintana as best riders in field since they are far away from that, they can only do Tour de France, sometime froome Vuelta or Quintana Giro
they did not proved to be competitive in other races there are several other riders I am considering better
 
Feb 26, 2015
228
0
0
Re:

SeriousSam said:
Why not? Froome has won the Tour twice, one more time than Nibali, and against better competition. Whether 1 more Tour and beating a quality field is worth a Giro, a Vuelta and a Lombardia.. hard to say.

But even so, it's a great achievement by Nibali. Winning the Tour and a monument is a rare acomplishment, although I'm starting to think that the very top GT climbers would have a reasonably chance to win Liege and Lombardia in most years, if only they made it a target. Shameful that they don't, but it shows how the Tour trumps everything else by miles.
It's not hard to say at all! It's not even close! Giro+Lombardia, or Vuelta instead of Giro, is at least equal to winning Le Tour. Those three combined tops Tour by a big, big margin
 
Aug 4, 2011
3,647
0
0
For me the tour was the weakest out of the big 3 GT's. We never got to see Nibs at is best. Bertie was recovering from the Giro so we ended up with Thomas dragging Froome around who was spent by the end of week 2.
Quintana was to scared to attack or lose his position so it was a bit of a let down in that aspect.

The other 2 GT's were more exciting IMO for the unexpected and riders laying it on the line.

if Froome had rode/ aimed for the Giro or the Vuelta this year he would have been dumped on his bum. He could just about finish the 3rd week of the tour.
Astana/Aru would have destroyed him in the 3rd week /end of 2nd week.
For me Aru/ Astana put everyone to the sword in both those races its a shame they were not at the tour but I'm not sure Nibs could have coped with that Astana train.
Aru /Astana lay it on the line, they are not scared to lose unlike Quintana and Movie. [not Valverde]
It's very rare that we get that kind of excitement in a tour , Evans win was great one of the most exciting tours of recent years . Landis going mental etc that's what I want to see.
 
Re: Re:

bala v said:
SeriousSam said:
Why not? Froome has won the Tour twice, one more time than Nibali, and against better competition. Whether 1 more Tour and beating a quality field is worth a Giro, a Vuelta and a Lombardia.. hard to say.

But even so, it's a great achievement by Nibali. Winning the Tour and a monument is a rare acomplishment, although I'm starting to think that the very top GT climbers would have a reasonably chance to win Liege and Lombardia in most years, if only they made it a target. Shameful that they don't, but it shows how the Tour trumps everything else by miles.
It's not hard to say at all! It's not even close! Giro+Lombardia, or Vuelta instead of Giro, is at least equal to winning Le Tour. Those three combined tops Tour by a big, big margin
A monument + GT >= Tour in my mind.
But Giro + Vuelta < Tour and it is not even close
 
May 19, 2010
173
0
0
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
Jspear said:
So Nibbes has one monument win and know he's the greatest. So is one monument worth 4 gt's in your opinion?
This is where it gets interesting, because it comes down to discussion. Like with Valverde Vs. Boonen. That one Vuelta doesn't put him above Boonen for me, he'd need probably another two Vueltas or a Giro or Tour in terms of GTs. If he won the WCRR or LBL then it gets very close, he'd probably just nick it but that depends on if Boonen can fire in the cobbled classics one last time. Kelly is better than both.

There are two active GT riders who have won all three GTs which puts them head and shoulders above the rest. Only 6 people in the entire history of racing have managed that. Not Coppi, Indurain, Bobet, Bartali, Gimondi, Pantani, Fignon etc. Some of the greatest GT riders to ever throw a leg over the bike.

As far as I'm concerned, what makes a better GT rider, in my opinion, is one who can put himself on possibly the most elite list in cycling and go out and win monuments. That's my opinion, people can disagree as much as they want but they won't change it.
I think you need to clarify more what you are saying.

Judging GT riders based on there performances in monuments is crazy. It would be like judging PR riders based on how they go in the king of the mountain tour.

So if you are asking who is the best GT rider in GT, you should only consider GT results. In this case contador is the best.

However if you are asking who is overall the best rider out of GT contenders then you can include monuments and other races. In which case nibali is the best.


The second is what I know you mean but they way some of your posts read is that because nibali has won a monument he should be the top favourite for any GT.
 
Jun 8, 2015
306
0
0
Omg. So happy that Nibs won Lombardia! Have wanted this for years! Congrats Lo Squalo and such a great note to end 2015 on :D
 
Jun 8, 2015
306
0
0
Re:

46&twoWheels said:
froomie&quintana cannot be mentioned in the same breath as Nibali&Contador ...from whatever perspective you look at it (gts, better rider, even entertainment!!...)
Completely agree with this ^^
no contest!
 
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
0
0
seriously, nibali a legend? better than AC? this guy prepared this season only for the tour and he was SMACHED BY FROOME!!! next year he will go for the giro only because he fears froome and contador. he won a vuelta because anton fell... he won a tour because froome and contador fell. IS SO SIMPLE!!!
 
Re: Re:

richo36 said:
King Boonen said:
Jspear said:
So Nibbes has one monument win and know he's the greatest. So is one monument worth 4 gt's in your opinion?
This is where it gets interesting, because it comes down to discussion. Like with Valverde Vs. Boonen. That one Vuelta doesn't put him above Boonen for me, he'd need probably another two Vueltas or a Giro or Tour in terms of GTs. If he won the WCRR or LBL then it gets very close, he'd probably just nick it but that depends on if Boonen can fire in the cobbled classics one last time. Kelly is better than both.

There are two active GT riders who have won all three GTs which puts them head and shoulders above the rest. Only 6 people in the entire history of racing have managed that. Not Coppi, Indurain, Bobet, Bartali, Gimondi, Pantani, Fignon etc. Some of the greatest GT riders to ever throw a leg over the bike.

As far as I'm concerned, what makes a better GT rider, in my opinion, is one who can put himself on possibly the most elite list in cycling and go out and win monuments. That's my opinion, people can disagree as much as they want but they won't change it.
I think you need to clarify more what you are saying.

Judging GT riders based on there performances in monuments is crazy. It would be like judging PR riders based on how they go in the king of the mountain tour.

So if you are asking who is the best GT rider in GT, you should only consider GT results. In this case contador is the best.

However if you are asking who is overall the best rider out of GT contenders then you can include monuments and other races. In which case nibali is the best.


The second is what I know you mean but they way some of your posts read is that because nibali has won a monument he should be the top favourite for any GT.
Well, this is exactly what I have argued, but I guess I just wasnt able to articulate it like that. Well said
 
Apr 16, 2011
1,074
1
0
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
damian13ster said:
I agree with him. For a cyclist that already won all GTs, winning a monument is much more impressive than continue amassing Giros and Vueltas.
So Nibali might not be the best rider purely in GTs, but if Boonen classifies him as a GT rider, then he is the best among cyclists classified as GT riders (if you can follow that logic).
I think it is between him and Valverde as best cyclist of this generation, but since Valverde is stained by a clinic ban, I think the title goes to Nibali. If only one of them could win a WC, that would pretty much settle the discussion
Basically 100% agree with this.
Valverde and Nibali are a more interesting comparison than comparing either to Contador. Nibali has 3 GT's and a Monument, Valverde has three Monuments and a GT. Nibali has won all three GT's though each only once, and Valverde only one Monument, but three times. Nibali has no sprint, and relies on aggressive tactics more than opportunity really presents, while Valverde is a fantastic finisher, who settles for the podium perhaps when he shouldn't. Nibali outperforms himself, Valverde everyone else.
 
Re:

portugal11 said:
seriously, nibali a legend? better than AC? this guy prepared this season only for the tour and he was SMACHED BY FROOME!!! next year he will go for the giro only because he fears froome and contador. he won a vuelta because anton fell... he won a tour because froome and contador fell. IS SO SIMPLE!!!

Go away. You sound like a broken record and I am quite confident that I am speaking for a majority here. People are seriously tired of your act.
Grow up a bit, learn how to articulate your thoughts, watch some races, learn to appreciate cyclists and then come back to become a valuable and contributing member of this board.

And if that seems like attacking a poster and not a post: if you see all 20+ posts by this user......they all look exactly the same, hence criticizing a single post pretty much criticizes every single thing that this user ever contributed to this forum
 
Sep 18, 2015
81
0
0
I have some nice picture of Nibali in my mind:first in the snowstorm on Tre Cime di Lvaredo, dirty and wet in the coble stage at TDF, looking bad after the fall at Firenze WC, daredavil in the Lombardia descent, going all out in the Angliru mist.And some bad ones, like Vuelta DSQ or TDF fight with Froome. He is a funny racer and a hard fighter and like everybody, he has some bad days. But its such a joy to see him racing when he attacks!
 
Re:

portugal11 said:
seriously, nibali a legend? better than AC? this guy prepared this season only for the tour and he was SMACHED BY FROOME!!! next year he will go for the giro only because he fears froome and contador. he won a vuelta because anton fell... he won a tour because froome and contador fell. IS SO SIMPLE!!!

Crashing is part of racing
 
Re:

portugal11 said:
seriously, nibali a legend? better than AC? this guy prepared this season only for the tour and he was SMACHED BY FROOME!!! next year he will go for the giro only because he fears froome and contador. he won a vuelta because anton fell... he won a tour because froome and contador fell. IS SO SIMPLE!!!
Best of Trolls!

LOL
 
Re: Re:

phanatic said:
Valverde and Nibali are a more interesting comparison than comparing either to Contador. Nibali has 3 GT's and a Monument, Valverde has three Monuments and a GT. Nibali has won all three GT's though each only once, and Valverde only one Monument, but three times. Nibali has no sprint, and relies on aggressive tactics more than opportunity really presents, while Valverde is a fantastic finisher, who settles for the podium perhaps when he shouldn't. Nibali outperforms himself, Valverde everyone else.
That's a very interesting comparison indeed.
I'd say Valverde has the edge at the moment, but he's also 4 years older.

As for the Giro, Nibali said he loves the route.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY