Who deserves the Vélo d'Or the most so far?

[hrotha]

Things this thread has established to be crucial to winning the Vélo d'Or:
- Getting sick
- Winning kermesses

What else?

 

[El Pistolero]

Re:

Things this thread has established to be crucial to winning the Vélo d'Or:
- Getting sick
- Winning kermesses

What else?

They took Contador's crash into account in 2014. Of course Echoes' argument with regard to Gullegem Koerse is totally ridiculous.

Right now I give Sagan the edge because he won the inaugural European Championships. Although the field wasn't as good as it could be (no Valverde, Nibali, Cancellara or GVA)

Was Kristoff at the European Championships?

 

[trucido]

Re:

Things this thread has established to be crucial to winning the Vélo d'Or:
- Getting sick
- Winning kermesses

What else?

- Not winning 'peanut' TdF stages

 

[johnymax]

I gave Golden Greg my vote last year. How can it be any different this year.

He's proved to being stronger than Sagan on the tougher routes. Even in the Omloop he was better. He won a mid-mountain Tour of France stage which is worth something while the ones Sagan won are peanuts, he got Olympic champion when Sagan judged the route too hard for him. He won a good kermess (Gullegem). He won the harder of the two French-Canadian races. Only thing is he couldn't race the spring classics but due to a crash.

I can't say I agree with much of this... Let's walk through the season clashes of GVA and Sagan to see what actually happened:

I won't include races where one or the other of the duo was absent, as well as Tour of California for the sake of making a fair comparison.

Omloop: Van Avermaet played his cards right, and Sagan probably wasn't quite at his best yet at that point in the season. The only race of the season, where GVA was possibly the stronger of the two. - GVA wins
Strade Bianche: Van Avermaet was not strong enough to close down Sagan/Stybar's move. He can't say he didn't have the option of following, since Cancellara single-handedly closed the gap from behind. - Sagan wins
Tirreno: Sagan was a second away from winning Tirreno Adriatico. Van Avermaet won the race because BMC won the team time trial - not because he was any stronger than Sagan at any point. - Sagan wins
Milano San-Remo: Hard to say who was the strongest of the two. Both tried their luck with no success. - tie
Gent-Wevelgem No doubt, Sagan was stronger. Van Avermaet simply didn't have the necessary power to follow, when Cancellara and Sagan opened up. - Sagan wins
Tour de France This is a difficult one. In the end, Sagan had better results, but Van Avermaet also had his moments. I'll give it to Sagan, though. First of all, Sagan won, when the level competition was it its highest (Especially the stages to Cherbourg and Bern), while Van Avermaet only had to "defeat" two or three opponents, including an in-form De Gendt and an off-form Majka. Secondly, Sagan was in the break for several mountain-stages, not working for himself but actually for his team. Eventually he was still only centimeters away from winning on Champs Elysees, having already put in a massive amount of work during the last week. Van Avermaet was in the breaks aswell, but didn't have to put in the same effort. - Sagan wins
Canadian WT events For me, Sagan takes the cake as the strongest rider. To use your own evaluation method, Sagan was actually very strong in the toughest of the two races. If you honestly believe that Van Avermaet had won the race, if he had put in the same amount of work to close gaps like Sagan did, then that is your call.. I don't believe so. Tactically great riding from GVA, but not a proof of superior strength. - Sagan wins.

Atleast in my view, it's pretty obvious that Sagan has been the stronger rider during their 2016 encounters. However, tactically, Van Avermaet has been the smarter rider - which is also the main reason, he's starting to win races.

Nice write-up. I'd also add, while there's a lot of talk about how Sagan can't sprint against Greg when he (or both) does a lot of work during the race, stage 10 of the Tour Escaldes-Engordany - Revel. There was a very strong break, remember, including Nibali, Landa, Rui Costa, Matthews+2teamates, GVA, Sagan, EBH, Gallopin, Cummings, Chavanel,... It was one of the strongest breaks I can remember. Sagan destroyed this group to pieces on the little hill. What, 6 riders could follow him includinc 3 OBE riders who all rode against Peter. He was the only one chasing the moves. I'm not sure if EBH give him some help but if I remember correctly GVA didn't take a single pull. It ended in a 6 men sprint where Matthews barely beat Sagan who did 90% of work amongst the riders contesting the sprint. He beat EBH, GVA and S. Dumoulin pretty comfortably despite all the work he's done. After that stage I really cannot see how anyone can say he can't sprint after a though race/stage.

 

[DFA123]

I'd have probably gone for GVA pre-Vuelta, but it's clearly Froome who deserves it now. 1st and 2nd in GTs (winning the biggest one), plus five stage victories, GC at the Dauphine, and an olympic medal - puts him miles above everyone else this year. As unfortunate as that may be.

 

[johnymax]

As for the topic, it's Froome also for me right now.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re:

I'd have probably gone for GVA pre-Vuelta, but it's clearly Froome who deserves it now. 1st and 2nd in GTs (winning the biggest one), plus five stage victories, GC at the Dauphine, and an olympic medal - puts him miles above everyone else this year. As unfortunate as that may be.

He won 4 stages, not 5. Besides, Sagan won 3 Tour stages and the green jersey. If he had competed in the Vuelta he'd have won 5 stages or something. The competition was that terrible.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Re: Re:

Very hard to judge, but as of right now:

1. Froome
2. Sagan
3. GVA/Quintana

Quintana is not on the same level as GVA this year. He was terrible for his main objective.

Olympic gold in the road race is also bigger than a Vuelta win. It's a shame GVA crashed out for the spring classics.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

I'd have probably gone for GVA pre-Vuelta, but it's clearly Froome who deserves it now. 1st and 2nd in GTs (winning the biggest one), plus five stage victories, GC at the Dauphine, and an olympic medal - puts him miles above everyone else this year. As unfortunate as that may be.

He won 4 stages, not 5. Besides, Sagan won 3 Tour stages and the green jersey. If he had competed in the Vuelta he'd have won 5 stages or something. The competition was that terrible.

Well, it was five including the TTT. And a rider winning mountain or TT GT stages is a lot more impressive than a sprinter winning stages suited to them. The point about the Vuelta is irrelevant, because Sagan wasn't there so he didn't win them. The competition for sprinters may have been poor, but for climbers it was the best quality field of the year and Froome still picked up 2 (or 3) stages.

I'd normally always go for a classics rider over a GT specialist for this kind of award. But Froome has had such an outstanding year - particularly in the Tour - you just can't ignore him. Sagan doesn't have enough high quality wins to come close.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

I'd have probably gone for GVA pre-Vuelta, but it's clearly Froome who deserves it now. 1st and 2nd in GTs (winning the biggest one), plus five stage victories, GC at the Dauphine, and an olympic medal - puts him miles above everyone else this year. As unfortunate as that may be.

He won 4 stages, not 5. Besides, Sagan won 3 Tour stages and the green jersey. If he had competed in the Vuelta he'd have won 5 stages or something. The competition was that terrible.

Well, it was five including the TTT. And a rider winning mountain or TT GT stages is a lot more impressive than a sprinter winning stages suited to them. The point about the Vuelta is irrelevant, because Sagan wasn't there so he didn't win them. The competition for sprinters may have been poor, but for climbers it was the best quality field of the year and Froome still picked up 2 (or 3) stages.

I'd normally always go for a classics rider over a GT specialist for this kind of award. But Froome has had such an outstanding year - particularly in the Tour - you just can't ignore him. Sagan doesn't have enough high quality wins to come close.

A tired Quintana and a Contador who seems past it is not what I call the best quality field... Maybe on paper...

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

Very hard to judge, but as of right now:

1. Froome
2. Sagan
3. GVA/Quintana

Quintana is not on the same level as GVA this year. He was terrible for his main objective.

Olympic gold in the road race is also bigger than a Vuelta win. It's a shame GVA crashed out for the spring classics.

That's indeed a good image for Quintana. I love how he always whines when he loses the Tour like the chump he is. Let's see, Olympic Road Race is the most prestigious one-day race out there... the Vuelta on the other hand is the least prestigious GT by far.

Olympic Gold in the road race, Tirreno-Adriatico (more prestigious than Catalunya or Romandie), a stage in the Tour plus a couple of days yellow, Omloop het Nieuwsblad and GP Montreal easily beats Quintana's season.

Anyway my ranking:

1. Sagan
2. Froome
3. GVA
4. Quintana

 

[burning]

Re: Re:

Things this thread has established to be crucial to winning the Vélo d'Or:
- Getting sick
- Winning kermesses

What else?

- Not winning 'peanut' TdF stages

and not winning some "minor" stage races. I love that how he said that GVA's had a great Tour because he won a medium-mountain stage but Sagan and Froome did nothing in note during Tour.

 

[MacBAir]

There is a lot of lies, FUD and flatout BS on this thread, specially from Echoes.

For starters, Sagan beat GVA way more then the other way around, on a big variety of stages and races (cobbles, hills, dirt, mountains, flat stages, TTs, etc.). GVA won a Tirreno stage and the GC because of BMC (TTT, Wheelsucking Peter) while losing time to Peter everywhere else. As the bigger objectives were getting closer, it was pretty clear that the delta in power between the two was growing and despite starting very strong and always being the 2nd best rider on the peloton, Greg is no match for Peak Sagan.

All that posters like Echoes can do about the fact that Sagan was able to absolutely destroy his opposition as the big favorite at RVV and GW is cry: "wah wah, GVA was a bit sick and couldn't handle his bike".

Then, both got fat for a few months. What did we saw at California and Suisse? Sagan having amazing brutal wins (specially California), and GVA trying to suck Sagan's wheel at a peculiar ATOCalifornia's stage 200KM away from the finish, forcing Sagan to go solo. Again, the only option that guys like Echoes have here is cry: "wah wah, GVA was still sick".

At the Tour, we saw Sagan demolishing GVA and the rest on a hilly sprint, a flat tour stage against Froome, and an awesome tough finish against Kristoff. He also won Green, again, and also used the Yellow jersey, and had amazing performances on medium and high mountain stages (Sagan Vs Orica while GVA wheelsucks Peter, anyone?). What did GVA do? Won an amazing stage, from a breakaway that he was allowed to be in, had yellow, and wheelsucked Peter on some stages. Great Tour, all things considered, but again worse then Peter.

Then, at the Olympics, Sagan was a coward and GVA was a great fighter. He won a fantastic race, because the 3 strongest riders that were allowed to go ahead had a lot of bad luck. Did he won because he blow the favorites out of his wheel? No, he won because he is very smart, very tough, awesome, and lucky. Nice.

At Montereal and Quebec, they both won 1 race against the other. Sagan was clearly strongest in one, and maybe in the other one too. But Greg was also very strong and smart. Smarttness is as important as power, and he will teach that to Peter.

Then Peter won the first ever ERR. Without a team. And was already contesting stages in the next day while GVA sat in.

There's a big difference between the 2: Sagan wins a variety of races (monuments, tour stages) because be blows the competition away, despite being the favorite, and GVA sneaks in or is allowed to go, most often than not.

People may like it or not, but that's the difference between them, Same for Froome and Quintana. It's always everybody against Froome.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re: Re:

I'd have probably gone for GVA pre-Vuelta, but it's clearly Froome who deserves it now. 1st and 2nd in GTs (winning the biggest one), plus five stage victories, GC at the Dauphine, and an olympic medal - puts him miles above everyone else this year. As unfortunate as that may be.

He won 4 stages, not 5. Besides, Sagan won 3 Tour stages and the green jersey. If he had competed in the Vuelta he'd have won 5 stages or something. The competition was that terrible.

Well, it was five including the TTT. And a rider winning mountain or TT GT stages is a lot more impressive than a sprinter winning stages suited to them. The point about the Vuelta is irrelevant, because Sagan wasn't there so he didn't win them. The competition for sprinters may have been poor, but for climbers it was the best quality field of the year and Froome still picked up 2 (or 3) stages.

I'd normally always go for a classics rider over a GT specialist for this kind of award. But Froome has had such an outstanding year - particularly in the Tour - you just can't ignore him. Sagan doesn't have enough high quality wins to come close.

A tired Quintana and a Contador who seems past it is not what I call the best quality field... Maybe on paper...

If Froome is doing 6w/kg for 30 minutes and still being beaten, I don't think you can dismiss Quintana as a competitor

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re: Re:

Very hard to judge, but as of right now:

1. Froome
2. Sagan
3. GVA/Quintana

Quintana is not on the same level as GVA this year. He was terrible for his main objective.

Olympic gold in the road race is also bigger than a Vuelta win. It's a shame GVA crashed out for the spring classics.

That's indeed a good image for Quintana. I love how he always whines when he loses the Tour like the chump he is. Let's see, Olympic Road Race is the most prestigious one-day race out there... the Vuelta on the other hand is the least prestigious GT by far.

Olympic Gold in the road race, Tirreno-Adriatico (more prestigious than Catalunya or Romandie), a stage in the Tour plus a couple of days yellow, Omloop het Nieuwsblad and GP Montreal easily beats Quintana's season.

Anyway my ranking:

1. Sagan
2. Froome
3. GVA
4. Quintana

TA is not more prestigious than Catalunya or Romandie if the queen stage gets cancelled.

As for the poll, there should be a new one after Lombardia, given that this one was created before the Vuelta, Canada, WCRR, Lomabrdy etc

There's a good chance that your favourite rider may end up as a contender after the WCRR

 

[SKSemtex]

I love one with peanuts wins.
Running away from peloton in last kilometers in flat Tout stage we see every year several times

I love GVA. He is by far my second most favourite rider. I do consider his win in OGRR the best cycling win of the year. But only troll can state that his Tour was better then Sagan one. Or that he is always better then Sagan in hard races.
Yes, the best example was the stage when Sagan dropped Nibali and Costa on flat, did all the Orica chasing and still was able to beat GVA in sprint. Sure GVA can beat him fair and squere but notalways at all.

BTW. Nibali was so close to win this competition only with two races.

 

[Mr.White]

Froome
Sagan
Quintana
Van Avermaet

But this could easily change. Margin between Froome and Sagan is slim. Eneco overall plus stage could turn things around, for example...

 

[sir fly]

Only if Sagan finishes off the season with the World's defence he'll deserve it.
Froome, by now, had a season comparable only with performances from previous century.

 

[Mr.White]

Re:

Only if Sagan finishes off the season with the World's defence he'll deserve it.
Froome, by now, had a season comparable only with performances from previous century.

Gilbert 2011 was better

 

[sir fly]

Re: Re:

Only if Sagan finishes off the season with the World's defence he'll deserve it.
Froome, by now, had a season comparable only with performances from previous century.

Gilbert 2011 was better

In his department, off course. That gives Sagan's result a measure for comparison.
In its department, Froome's season stands out in this century.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

Only if Sagan finishes off the season with the World's defence he'll deserve it.
Froome, by now, had a season comparable only with performances from previous century.

Gilbert 2011 was better

In his department, off course. That gives Sagan's result a measure for comparison.
In its department, Froome's season stands out in this century.

Boonen was better, the best season of this century without a doubt:

- E3 Harelbeke
- Ronde van Vlaanderen
- Paris-Roubaix
- 2 Tour stages
- World Championships Road Race

 

[SKSemtex]

Re:

There is a lot of lies, FUD and flatout BS on this thread, specially from Echoes.

For starters, Sagan beat GVA way more then the other way around, on a big variety of stages and races (cobbles, hills, dirt, mountains, flat stages, TTs, etc.). GVA won a Tirreno stage and the GC because of BMC (TTT, Wheelsucking Peter) while losing time to Peter everywhere else. As the bigger objectives were getting closer, it was pretty clear that the delta in power between the two was growing and despite starting very strong and always being the 2nd best rider on the peloton, Greg is no match for Peak Sagan.

All that posters like Echoes can do about the fact that Sagan was able to absolutely destroy his opposition as the big favorite at RVV and GW is cry: "wah wah, GVA was a bit sick and couldn't handle his bike".

Then, both got fat for a few months. What did we saw at California and Suisse? Sagan having amazing brutal wins (specially California), and GVA trying to suck Sagan's wheel at a peculiar ATOCalifornia's stage 200KM away from the finish, forcing Sagan to go solo. Again, the only option that guys like Echoes have here is cry: "wah wah, GVA was still sick".

At the Tour, we saw Sagan demolishing GVA and the rest on a hilly sprint, a flat tour stage against Froome, and an awesome tough finish against Kristoff. He also won Green, again, and also used the Yellow jersey, and had amazing performances on medium and high mountain stages (Sagan Vs Orica while GVA wheelsucks Peter, anyone?). What did GVA do? Won an amazing stage, from a breakaway that he was allowed to be in, had yellow, and wheelsucked Peter on some stages. Great Tour, all things considered, but again worse then Peter.

Then, at the Olympics, Sagan was a coward and GVA was a great fighter. He won a fantastic race, because the 3 strongest riders that were allowed to go ahead had a lot of bad luck. Did he won because he blow the favorites out of his wheel? No, he won because he is very smart, very tough, awesome, and lucky. Nice.

At Montereal and Quebec, they both won 1 race against the other. Sagan was clearly strongest in one, and maybe in the other one too. But Greg was also very strong and smart. Smarttness is as important as power, and he will teach that to Peter.

Then Peter won the first ever ERR. Without a team. And was already contesting stages in the next day while GVA sat in.

There's a big difference between the 2: Sagan wins a variety of races (monuments, tour stages) because be blows the competition away, despite being the favorite, and GVA sneaks in or is allowed to go, most often than not.

People may like it or not, but that's the difference between them, Same for Froome and Quintana. It's always everybody against Froome.

I wait for the Tour when it finaly will be everybody against Froome. What I have been witnessing since 2013 is Froome and bunch of cowards and hopeless top ten defenders and superdomestic Porte.

 

[Brullnux]

In 2014 we witnessed Froome fall like a diseased tree. Apart from that and Quintana realising that he had a chance in Stage 20 of 2015 we haven't seen much. But it's not like in 2013 anyone could've really done something.

 

[Escarabajo]

I'll give Froome the edge but it could change.

GVA is a nice dude but the other two had by far bigger performances. Tirreno was a joke this year.

Winning the Tour is not easy, no matter how defensively they other riders ride. It is so hard that sometimes you have to finish the mountains running!

 

[Jancouver]

Numbers don't lie ... so therefore as of today:


Rank Rider Team Date of birth CQ

1. SVK SAGAN Peter TNK 26/01/1990 2635
2. GBR FROOME Chris SKY 20/05/1985 2552
3. COL QUINTANA ROJAS Nairo Alexander MOV 04/02/1990 2392
4. BEL VAN AVERMAET Greg BMC 17/05/1985 2030
5. ESP VALVERDE BELMONTE Alejandro MOV 25/04/1980 2030