-
Giro d'Italia 2025 - Follow the race via our live blog for all the latest news!
- Apr 16, 2009
- 17,357
- 6,426
- 28,180
- Apr 16, 2009
- 17,357
- 6,426
- 28,180
- Aug 31, 2012
- 7,550
- 3
- 0
- Jun 18, 2015
- 784
- 17
- 10,010
I don't wan't to hurt any feelings, but I feel that Cavendish is somewhat of an overhyped figure in cycling in an attempt to create a local superstar to the fast-growing anglo fanbase.
He has been a super dominant sprinter of course (for 4-5years) but to become a leyend he has to have legendary performances to be remembered. For the type of rider he is, that required not only winning sprints but also competing in classics or something to round his palmares.
For me, Mark Cavendish is not more legendary than the Erik Zabels or Oscar Freires of the world.
He has been a super dominant sprinter of course (for 4-5years) but to become a leyend he has to have legendary performances to be remembered. For the type of rider he is, that required not only winning sprints but also competing in classics or something to round his palmares.
For me, Mark Cavendish is not more legendary than the Erik Zabels or Oscar Freires of the world.
Re:
Of course it's harder to dominate today and we likely won't see another Merckx or Hinault. With that being said I really can't see a rider like Cavendish ever being considered a legend no matter how many green jerseys and Tour stages he will win. Cavendish is heavily dependent on his team and I can't recall if he has ever won a stage where he really had to work himself (of course getting over climbs is hard work for a rider like him but that doesn't cut it).
A rider like Cancellara is 10 times the legend Cavendish is. Winning Paris-Roubaix attacking all his rivals from 50 k out, dropping Boonen on the Muur while sitting on his saddle cruising to victory in Flanders, Attacking with 1 k to go in a flat stage and fending off the sprinters, these are the things that make a special rider. Not being the fastest cyclist in the world in 200 metres.
SeriousSam said:
Of course it's harder to dominate today and we likely won't see another Merckx or Hinault. With that being said I really can't see a rider like Cavendish ever being considered a legend no matter how many green jerseys and Tour stages he will win. Cavendish is heavily dependent on his team and I can't recall if he has ever won a stage where he really had to work himself (of course getting over climbs is hard work for a rider like him but that doesn't cut it).
A rider like Cancellara is 10 times the legend Cavendish is. Winning Paris-Roubaix attacking all his rivals from 50 k out, dropping Boonen on the Muur while sitting on his saddle cruising to victory in Flanders, Attacking with 1 k to go in a flat stage and fending off the sprinters, these are the things that make a special rider. Not being the fastest cyclist in the world in 200 metres.
It isn't just about palmares. I agree with those who have mentioned Kelly and Pantani.
The former had great palmares and the image and panache. He also managed to win outside his zone of comfort (Vuelta). And 7 P-N titles!
I am not a big fan of Pantani. But he is more or less the definition of a legend. Transcends the sport. Legendary feats. Big rivalries. And you can't have any hilly race in Italy without talk of Pantani's exploits. Or talks of memorials to the guy. This is where he attacked. This is where he trained. This is where he had a p!ss. This is where he used to snort charlie.
Of those not mentioned, JVDB, Landis.
The former had great palmares and the image and panache. He also managed to win outside his zone of comfort (Vuelta). And 7 P-N titles!
I am not a big fan of Pantani. But he is more or less the definition of a legend. Transcends the sport. Legendary feats. Big rivalries. And you can't have any hilly race in Italy without talk of Pantani's exploits. Or talks of memorials to the guy. This is where he attacked. This is where he trained. This is where he had a p!ss. This is where he used to snort charlie.
Of those not mentioned, JVDB, Landis.
- Jan 27, 2012
- 13,930
- 1,014
- 25,680
[/quote]
maybe Singer is talking about Olympic Medals (which in terms of numbers few others have achieved)[/quote]
this, who else has had a road season like brad, and been a multiple track, world and olympic champion, and WTT and hour record to boot? however i absolutely don't think he is a legend, just saying that criteria would include brad.
for me there has to be a cut off point as the further you go down the list there is such small differences between riders. the obvious cut off point for me is below Eddie, Bernie and Fausto.
maybe Singer is talking about Olympic Medals (which in terms of numbers few others have achieved)[/quote]
this, who else has had a road season like brad, and been a multiple track, world and olympic champion, and WTT and hour record to boot? however i absolutely don't think he is a legend, just saying that criteria would include brad.
for me there has to be a cut off point as the further you go down the list there is such small differences between riders. the obvious cut off point for me is below Eddie, Bernie and Fausto.
- May 23, 2009
- 10,243
- 1,433
- 25,680
I'm surprised by the lack of support for De Vlaeminck here. He had a colossal palmares, the only thing missing is a GT win - his best placing was 4th at the Giro, along with 22 Giro stage wins, 6x Tirreno GC, Romandie GC, Catalunya GC along with all of his classics wins and Cyclocross World and National Titles. Don't forget that he also had to do it against Merckx, Van Looy and later on, Hinault.
Re: Re:
The first sentence is not true in the slightest and shows a lack of knowledge of those eras. In Merckx's days, riders like Roger Rosiers or Marc Demeyer specialised in cobble races and were known for that, Fuente and Galdós among others were specialised in climbing, Van Impe or Thévenet in stage races and to some extent hilly classics, Rik Van Linden or Jacques Esclassan couldn't do anything but sprinting, Danny Clark and Graeme Gilmore specialised in Madison track racing, etc. The complete riders were simply the best but a happy few. Usually that's because they were great stamina riders: Merckx, Gimondi, Poulidor to some extent De Vlaeminck or Zoetemelk.
The idea that oldtimers would be totally outclassed by present-day riders is ridiculous. Merckx on a stationary bike and with no ventilation could 455w in an hour. Today, only Cancellara or T. Martin could do that, and with ventilation. In the 1970 Paris-Roubaix, raced in terrible weather condition, made an average speed of 41.644kmh (on a normal bike, and weighing ~9kg and with very irregular cobbles; though should be said they had head Wind for the first two hours). In 2009 on dry conditions, with a "Paris-Roubaix special" bike and 2kg lighter, Tom Boonen made 41.342kmh (considered his finest performance). Fabian Cancellara's in 2010 - in dry though cloudy conditions - was a 39.325kmh average speed (also considered his finest performance).
Judge by yourself.
The reasons for the present-day specialisation are numerous. The main one can't be discussed on this section. However what can be pointed to is the polarisation of the race routes. Nowadays, hilly classics organizers put the emphasis on hard finales, whether with an uphill finish or a hard climb in the final ten kilometers. In mountain stage races, the mountain stages would typically finish with an MTF while in the old days, most of them finished in the valley (not talking about old these crap climbs like Angliru or Zoncolan that look more like a circus than real cycling and directly eliminate the most complete riders who are too heavy for that kind of stuff). When Rik Van Looy won the Walloon Arrow in 1968, it was seen as the crowning achievement of his career, the only classic he missed. But at that time the Arrow finished in Charleroi and the main climb of the finale was the Mur de Thuin. Those who've watched this year's last stage of the Tour of Wallonia could notice that the Mur de Thuin is a slightly cobbled short climb. So Flandrian type! So imagine the Arrow had the same route today, Boonen and Cancellara would make pretty good chance (I'm not even talking about the cobbles and bad asphalt that you then had). Today on the Mur de Huy, impossible! And don't tell me that it's a harder race today! This year's race was 205km, in 1968, it was 222.5km. In 1972 it was 249km. Generally speaking, races are nowadays much shorter than used to be, especially some classics or semi-classics which can no longer exceed 210km (thanks the UCI under Verbrugghen's leadership !!!; races like the Tre Valle Varesine or the Omloop easily exceeded 220km before 1990), while organizers are looking for very steep climbs (in finales) to make up for that shorter distance. It's pretty telling that most riders with a chance in GT's and hilly classics now rarely have a 65+kg form weight. How then can you expect them to be complete riders! Merckx, Gimondi or De Vlaeminck all had a 71/72kg form weight for a 180 to 184cm height. Riders like Gilbert or Rodriguez wouldn't have won so many races in older eras. They made the most of this new type of hilly routes. They've capitalised on the hard climbs in finales (Mur de Huy, Saint-Nicolas, Cauberg, etc) to show their amazing explosiveness (Michel Wuyts said it in the book he made with Mart Smeets, I think). But when it comes to consolidate a gap that they were able to create in a climb, they fall short. Example of that is the 2011 Tour of Flanders when Gilbert attacked in the Bosberg and was caught soon after. Gilbert is an explosive rider but he does not have the stamina (TT skills) for a long breakaway ride. Paris-Roubaix and to some extent the Tour of Flanders are the two last races that favour a stamina type of riders. The final climb of the Tour of Flanders whether on the old or the new route is 10km away from finish. It's rare these days. In my opinion that is still where you'd find the best current riders, for these reasons.
Fernandez said:
The first sentence is not true in the slightest and shows a lack of knowledge of those eras. In Merckx's days, riders like Roger Rosiers or Marc Demeyer specialised in cobble races and were known for that, Fuente and Galdós among others were specialised in climbing, Van Impe or Thévenet in stage races and to some extent hilly classics, Rik Van Linden or Jacques Esclassan couldn't do anything but sprinting, Danny Clark and Graeme Gilmore specialised in Madison track racing, etc. The complete riders were simply the best but a happy few. Usually that's because they were great stamina riders: Merckx, Gimondi, Poulidor to some extent De Vlaeminck or Zoetemelk.
The idea that oldtimers would be totally outclassed by present-day riders is ridiculous. Merckx on a stationary bike and with no ventilation could 455w in an hour. Today, only Cancellara or T. Martin could do that, and with ventilation. In the 1970 Paris-Roubaix, raced in terrible weather condition, made an average speed of 41.644kmh (on a normal bike, and weighing ~9kg and with very irregular cobbles; though should be said they had head Wind for the first two hours). In 2009 on dry conditions, with a "Paris-Roubaix special" bike and 2kg lighter, Tom Boonen made 41.342kmh (considered his finest performance). Fabian Cancellara's in 2010 - in dry though cloudy conditions - was a 39.325kmh average speed (also considered his finest performance).
Judge by yourself.
The reasons for the present-day specialisation are numerous. The main one can't be discussed on this section. However what can be pointed to is the polarisation of the race routes. Nowadays, hilly classics organizers put the emphasis on hard finales, whether with an uphill finish or a hard climb in the final ten kilometers. In mountain stage races, the mountain stages would typically finish with an MTF while in the old days, most of them finished in the valley (not talking about old these crap climbs like Angliru or Zoncolan that look more like a circus than real cycling and directly eliminate the most complete riders who are too heavy for that kind of stuff). When Rik Van Looy won the Walloon Arrow in 1968, it was seen as the crowning achievement of his career, the only classic he missed. But at that time the Arrow finished in Charleroi and the main climb of the finale was the Mur de Thuin. Those who've watched this year's last stage of the Tour of Wallonia could notice that the Mur de Thuin is a slightly cobbled short climb. So Flandrian type! So imagine the Arrow had the same route today, Boonen and Cancellara would make pretty good chance (I'm not even talking about the cobbles and bad asphalt that you then had). Today on the Mur de Huy, impossible! And don't tell me that it's a harder race today! This year's race was 205km, in 1968, it was 222.5km. In 1972 it was 249km. Generally speaking, races are nowadays much shorter than used to be, especially some classics or semi-classics which can no longer exceed 210km (thanks the UCI under Verbrugghen's leadership !!!; races like the Tre Valle Varesine or the Omloop easily exceeded 220km before 1990), while organizers are looking for very steep climbs (in finales) to make up for that shorter distance. It's pretty telling that most riders with a chance in GT's and hilly classics now rarely have a 65+kg form weight. How then can you expect them to be complete riders! Merckx, Gimondi or De Vlaeminck all had a 71/72kg form weight for a 180 to 184cm height. Riders like Gilbert or Rodriguez wouldn't have won so many races in older eras. They made the most of this new type of hilly routes. They've capitalised on the hard climbs in finales (Mur de Huy, Saint-Nicolas, Cauberg, etc) to show their amazing explosiveness (Michel Wuyts said it in the book he made with Mart Smeets, I think). But when it comes to consolidate a gap that they were able to create in a climb, they fall short. Example of that is the 2011 Tour of Flanders when Gilbert attacked in the Bosberg and was caught soon after. Gilbert is an explosive rider but he does not have the stamina (TT skills) for a long breakaway ride. Paris-Roubaix and to some extent the Tour of Flanders are the two last races that favour a stamina type of riders. The final climb of the Tour of Flanders whether on the old or the new route is 10km away from finish. It's rare these days. In my opinion that is still where you'd find the best current riders, for these reasons.
- Nov 7, 2010
- 8,820
- 246
- 17,880
Re: Re:
It's not just the specialization though; the domestiques are so much stronger now, because the level of professionalism in cycling goes much deeper. You can't win races in the same way now as previous generations could. Nowadays it is easier for a weaker rider to win a race because they are kept together for longer, but it is much harder for a stronger rider to dominate - to the extent where it is impossible to sucessfully specialize across all different disciplines.
edit... by the way, I meant to add that I enjoyed reading your post, some really good analysis and interesting details.
And how many Grand Tours have Cancellara and Tony Martin got close to winning?Echoes said:
It's not just the specialization though; the domestiques are so much stronger now, because the level of professionalism in cycling goes much deeper. You can't win races in the same way now as previous generations could. Nowadays it is easier for a weaker rider to win a race because they are kept together for longer, but it is much harder for a stronger rider to dominate - to the extent where it is impossible to sucessfully specialize across all different disciplines.
edit... by the way, I meant to add that I enjoyed reading your post, some really good analysis and interesting details.
Re: Re:
Maertens was 8th in '76 and it was one of the more mountainous editions won by no other than Van Impe. In this year Maertens on L'Alpe lost only ~4 minutes to guys like Van Impe, Zoetemelk & Galdos. If I could consider him as a jacked up Sagan then today I doubt he would lost less than 5 minutes to guys like Froome or Quintana. In 2013 Kwiatkowski was propably the closest Kelly impersonification in years and arguably a better climber than Freddy still lost 5 minutes to Purito and Nairo. Back in the 70-s and 80-s those flunctuations seems more frequent to my eye than at least 2010s. That could be of course quite logical as the professionalisation (or classification) of the cyclists didn't happen in one night.
You can find stamina guys not only in Roubaix or Flanders. Tony Martin or Kiryenka have a tendency to once in a while show some 100km solo rides in montainous areas. Rasmussen could do the same and he was a catastrophy in TTs (not counting '07 for obvious reasons). Doumulin is en route to become one of the odd years Vuelta winners. Contador can not only attack from far away (Fuente De, Monte Ologno) but maintain the tempo after attack or at least not to loose as much time and he's a GT guy, so he needs to manage his efforts in such way to not completly blow up next day.
I could consider Wiggins as one of the greater ones. Why? Because he can adapt to any climate he's living. A succesful track rider became a road TT specialist - that's normal, but then he's winning GTs as high as TdF and now he's competitive in PR. I don't think even clinic on itself can do such sudden transformations. Valverde because of his overall capabilities, Contador for his GT palamres, Pantani for riding the 10% slopes like they are 5-6%, the Merckx/stamina-type guys of the past years, Maertens, Zabel and Cavendish for their sprinting palmares etc.
What makes a legend? Not only the cyclist palmares makes him a legend. I could consider guys like VDB, Ricco, Sella, Armstrong or the Moser/Saronni duo legends because of their personality with VDB being propably the most fairytale/soap opera one of them. I could consider guys like Escartin, Froome and Evans legends because of their riding style. I could consider nowadays Contador as a perfect collage of palmares and personality.
EDIT:
Zubeldia is a legend in my eyes too because of the funny theories sorrounding around his person and his true ninja-like skills. You need to be a grandmaster to be like a cameleon in span of 10 years while top 10 or 20 GTs.
I don't have that much knowledge of the era, as i wasn't even born at the time, that's why I need to rely on the stage results. I hope i will be scholled and corrected. In this era guys like Didi Thurau, Sean Kelly, Freddy Maertens, F. Moser or Phil Anderson did top 10 TdF. Judging from the profiles the TdF was at least as hard as it is today.Echoes said:
Maertens was 8th in '76 and it was one of the more mountainous editions won by no other than Van Impe. In this year Maertens on L'Alpe lost only ~4 minutes to guys like Van Impe, Zoetemelk & Galdos. If I could consider him as a jacked up Sagan then today I doubt he would lost less than 5 minutes to guys like Froome or Quintana. In 2013 Kwiatkowski was propably the closest Kelly impersonification in years and arguably a better climber than Freddy still lost 5 minutes to Purito and Nairo. Back in the 70-s and 80-s those flunctuations seems more frequent to my eye than at least 2010s. That could be of course quite logical as the professionalisation (or classification) of the cyclists didn't happen in one night.
I'm not a classics jerk-off guy but for my eye it seems like a quite commitial statement. Maybe it's right as the hardening of the classics last kms could affect the sport's appearance. Still today LBL is becoming more and more a 30-50 group sprinterfest and I doubt that eg. scratching St. Nicolas would change anything. It could be then a 70-80 group sprinterfest ideal for Sagan or Matthews. I don't know why the sport looks nowadays like that, but it cannot be only because of the classics routes. The amount of MTFs is definitely bigger in Giro or Vuelta but TdF had 2-4 MTFs from at least 60s with the trend beggining to change only right now.Echoes said:
You can find stamina guys not only in Roubaix or Flanders. Tony Martin or Kiryenka have a tendency to once in a while show some 100km solo rides in montainous areas. Rasmussen could do the same and he was a catastrophy in TTs (not counting '07 for obvious reasons). Doumulin is en route to become one of the odd years Vuelta winners. Contador can not only attack from far away (Fuente De, Monte Ologno) but maintain the tempo after attack or at least not to loose as much time and he's a GT guy, so he needs to manage his efforts in such way to not completly blow up next day.
I could consider Wiggins as one of the greater ones. Why? Because he can adapt to any climate he's living. A succesful track rider became a road TT specialist - that's normal, but then he's winning GTs as high as TdF and now he's competitive in PR. I don't think even clinic on itself can do such sudden transformations. Valverde because of his overall capabilities, Contador for his GT palamres, Pantani for riding the 10% slopes like they are 5-6%, the Merckx/stamina-type guys of the past years, Maertens, Zabel and Cavendish for their sprinting palmares etc.
What makes a legend? Not only the cyclist palmares makes him a legend. I could consider guys like VDB, Ricco, Sella, Armstrong or the Moser/Saronni duo legends because of their personality with VDB being propably the most fairytale/soap opera one of them. I could consider guys like Escartin, Froome and Evans legends because of their riding style. I could consider nowadays Contador as a perfect collage of palmares and personality.
EDIT:
Zubeldia is a legend in my eyes too because of the funny theories sorrounding around his person and his true ninja-like skills. You need to be a grandmaster to be like a cameleon in span of 10 years while top 10 or 20 GTs.
Why did i forgot Petacchi and Cipollini is beyond my mind. i think Cipollini exceeds Petacchi in terms of palmares. He'd won the rainbow in i think 2002 and had more stage wins than Petacchi.Billie said:
Of current riders legends are folliwing : Contador (best gt rider all time), cav (best sprinteur of all time), wiggins (Pioneer in the way people race tempo riding and basically made cycling wat it is today) and Valverde who has been best rider for 12 years most podiums wc, podium tour, vuelta win, ardennns lots wins, sprints, hilly mountains. All this in an era were everyone is more specialty in my opinion most talented rider all time. Futur legends Froome (on his way to many gt), nibali, cancellara, Boonen (might already ne one).
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2025, stage 1: Durrës - Tirana (160.0k)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 435
-
Giro d'Italia 2025, stage 2: Tirana - Tirana (13.7k ITT)- Started by Gigs_98
- Replies: 112
-
Paris-Roubaix 2025, one day monument, April 13 (men)- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 2K
-
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 30K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 30K
Latest posts
-
-
Giro d'Italia 2025, stage 2: Tirana - Tirana (13.7k ITT)
- Latest: Tim Cahill
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram