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!
Because they are simply climbers by reason of that being their biggest strength. That’s how they made their mark in cycling. And I suppose they ride in the older idea of classic climbing style. But that is an old rubric, from when being a lightweight climber could outclimb the heavier GC guys who could TT. Now guys can be super skinny but still produce massive watts in TTs and the climbs. So categorizing someone as a climber no longer has much meaning.
Probably because they are classic stop start and accelerate at multiple speeds. The classic pure climbers of the 1980s. They don’t handle the trains and constant tempo.
Pantani's performance in Plateau de Beille 98 and Alpe D'Huez (95 and 97) are extremely different. It seems that people only look at the time without knowing the details of that climb.
With equal circumstances i.e. tailwind and super aggressive pace from he bottom the VAM should be higher cause it's shorter and AdH gets so many people the motors stays really close to the front rider.
Agree.Pantani's performance in Plateau de Beille 98 and Alpe D'Huez (95 and 97) are extremely different. It seems that people only look at the time without knowing the details of that climb.
Pantani wasn't supposed to even participate at the 1998 Tour de France. The president of Mercatone Uno suddenly died and in order to honor him Pantani decided to start at the TdF as well, after the legendary battle during the Giro vs Tonkov. To reiterate this, Pantani specifically trained to reach his absolute peak during the 1998 Giro.
His form was absolutely terrible in the first week of the TdF. He lost 48s in only 5.6km in the Prologue
Plateau de Beille 98 is one of the "worst" Pantani performance if we only count his wins. He was far from his best days, and even Cassani (Italian commentator back then) highlighted this during the stage, saying multiple times that Pantani wasn't doing anything special. It's actually insane that his record lasted so many years.
He won because Jan Ullrich was struggling as well. In fact, he completely cracked in stage 15 losing an insane amount of time.
Moreover, we should also take into account that Pantani had a very serious injury in 1995. He needed years of hard work to come back at his best level, especially in terms of consistency.
Having said that, Pantani is by far the best pure climber of cycling modern era.
So, you're saying there are better climbers, just not pure enough?
I don't want to be rude but what make Pantani so legendary was his premature death.
The premature death adds to it but he was already a rockstar cyclist, the bandana, earring, goatee, insane climbing ability. Can't ignore the fact that before this weekend he had like the three or four best ever climbing performances (+ Hautacam Riis).
Nah, his death was a great tragedy. I started watching cycling from about 1992. Marco was the David who beat the Goliath Ullrich and he did that with a Giro victory in his legs.
I don't understand people who say this. Pantani's feats are preserved on the internet. Stage 15 of the 1998 TdF should be compulsory viewing, along with his PdB victory earlier that edition.
Never... I think they can go 35:something. But 4-5 minutes would mean 31:50 to 32:50, and a VAM of roughly 2,200. No one can do that, not even at the super speeds they are currently showing.
Stage 15 till this day is the greatest stage ever
Well, he has the fastest time on the most well documented climb in cycling (Alpe d'Huez), he was the last to do the double (Giro-Tour, with being a pure climber even more), and he for sure had a period where he was invicible (1998 until he was taken out the Giro 1999) with all-time great performances. His fire burned bright and quick but for the time it did, he for sure was one of the best climbers of all time (adding glimpses of greatness before, and even after still).
Yes and I still think he is such a mhytical character because of his death even if he was very cheered in his time (specially in Italy where he is a God). However I can't say he was more likeable than Contador for example (when Pantani was alive). I don't have any doubt that LA would be way more legendary compared if both died in 2004. For me, there will not be other rider like Armstrong in popularity (even if he had more haters than Pantani).
Yes mate. This is the beauty of life. Of course I can't apply that sentence with my wife!
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram