The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Pogi never recovered from stage 11. As a neutral observer I much prefer to see Roglič win the TdF than Vingegaard. Can't say more here and I have expressed my reasoning long ago in the other forum.If you are an Australian you are obliged to vote for Giro. No other race comes close then. You have my full support on that one.
As for Roglič i would imagine he is rather fine now. In this regard. He doesn't have to obsess with Tour and beating Pogi on the Tour anymore. On top of that he got Pogi off his wheel. As for JV and supporting Roglič on the Tour. I agree with that being a far cry. In 23 hence Rogla will likely have to do Giro - Vuelta double. And maybe to go to Tour in 24. Preferably as UCI No.1.
Pogi never recovered from stage 11. As a neutral observer I much prefer to see Roglič win the TdF than Vingegaard. Can't say more here and I have expressed my reasoning long ago in the other forum.
Nah, 2003 had it all. 2007 was still better too. A closer GC fight and I'd reconsider thoughYes, it rivals 2003. And beats it.
So when exactly would this current era start? I think there are enough posters around who remember the Tours from the 80s to have those Tours valued as well. Since the time it happend, the 89 Tour has been widely considered the greatest Tour ever and even a quick read through a race summary would explain why.
Nah, 2003 had it all. 2007 was still better too. A closer GC fight and I'd reconsider though
I agree almost entirely with this.Tour > Vuelta > Giro
Vuelta got interesting `when Evenepoel started riding away on stage 6, and again after his crash when Roglic and Mas narrowed the gap. To top it all off there was the Roglic drama.
Giro got interesting about 5 minutes before the final mountain stage ended. Until then the cork was the main antagonist.
I'd rate them 8 for the Tour, 5.5 for the Vuelta and 3 for the Giro.
If you have watched 100 GTs, would you say that the distribution of their rating is uniform or normal? So how many of them were 8+? In any case, you can give this year's Tour a 9.1 and have the '89 edition as 9.8. A high score for this edition doesn't mean that there isn't space for even higher scores for other editions, so no recency bias is necessary.I can't rank it higher than better GTs I've watched, no matter how long ago. But everyone is free to enjoy their recency bias.
No, it didn't have "it all".
It had a first week consisting of one prologue, one TTT and five bunch sprints, four of which were won by the same rider who then abandoned.
I really think that for all the "recency bias" some people criticise fans of the 2022 Tour for having, people have forgotten all the tedious stages of past races and only remember the GC battle.
Which could have been much better in 2003, if the guy who looked like he could beat the tyrant didn't crash out - albeit spectacularly.
It even had the bad guy winning in the end.havi
In practice it is closer to a small-lambda Poisson distribution.If you have watched 100 GTs, would you say that the distribution of their rating is uniform or normal? So how many of them were 8+? In any case, you can give this year's Tour a 9.1 and have the '89 edition as 9.8. A high score for this edition doesn't mean that there isn't space for even higher scores for other editions, so no recency bias is necessary.
It's no secret that I rank them ordinally, thus the distribution of scores is uniform.
Really? So half of all GTs you've watched were below e.g. 3?In practice it is closer to a small-lambda Poisson distribution.
I can't tell it accurately but the median is definitely below 5Really? So half of all GTs you've watched were below e.g. 3?
So only one race can get the top grade?
I think my students would be quite sad if I applied that logic on them.
Tour was good but not that great and I'm a bit surplussed as to why it's rated so highly. One legendary stage does not make a GT for the ages.
Okay let's say 2.There were plenty of great stages.