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

[Ruby United]

Re: Re:

How anyone can rate Quintana's season over Sagan's is beyond me... It goes to show you how underrated one-day specialists are. And winning the green jersey also seems to be an underrated achievement just because Sagan has won it 5 times in a row. 2 more and he'll have a record.

Quintana only won some prep races and a consolation race this year. Color me not impressed. Is he in the top 5 this year? Yes... but he still failed in his biggest goal of the season.

I think I would rate Sagan's season higher but I understand people who don't. A GT win, even if it's "only" the vuelta is worth way more than the Ronde, a gc podium in the tour is probably more important than a green jersey, and Quintana's two world tour stage races are worth more than Sagan's two more world tour one day races. The reason why I would still rate Sagan's season higher is his high number of stage wins in different races and his European Champion title, while Quintana's "only" additional win was the Rud du Sud. I personally prefer Sagan's season but I think objectively they are even.

I'd rather be known as the guy who won the green jersey than the guy who finished third in the Tour (nobody remembers that).

And these days I'd consider the Ronde van Vlaanderen also more prestigious than the Vuelta. Almost nobody makes the Vuelta his main goal of the season, not even Spanish riders.

Agree with your first point but certainly not with your second point.
Only the World Champs are close to the Vuelta in terms of one day races with Paris Roubaix a bit behind it and then Ronde. But you certainly cannot compare Ronde to the Vuelta.
Still, Sagan's years was quite clearly better than Nairo's but worse than Froome's

 

[El Pistolero]

Re:

Wasn't Contador considered to have had the best season in 2014 on this forum?

Because there was nobody else who had a better season.

Nibali only won in the Tour and no one dominated the classics.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re: Re:

Wasn't Contador considered to have had the best season in 2014 on this forum?

Because there was nobody else who had a better season.

Nibali only won in the Tour and no one dominated the classics.

Funny how a guy can win the Velo d' Or by only winning a couple of warmup races and some b-grade race over in Spain nobody cares about then.

You make it seem like Quintana has done could be done by everyone. You are downplaying it miserably despite it actually, on paper, was better than Contador's 2014 season.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

Wasn't Contador considered to have had the best season in 2014 on this forum?

Because there was nobody else who had a better season.

Nibali only won in the Tour and no one dominated the classics.

Funny how a guy can win the Velo d' Or by only winning a couple of warmup races and some b-grade race over in Spain nobody cares about then.

You make it seem like Quintana has done could be done by everyone. You are downplaying it miserably despite it actually, on paper, was better than Contador's 2014 season.

Contador crashed out in the Tour, that he very well could have won. Quintana was miserable in the main goal of his season. Can you see the difference?

Also, nobody had a stellar year in 2014. In 2016 we have two cyclists who are having spectacular season. Quintana isn't competing against 2014 Contador for the Vélo d'Or, but 2016 Sagan and Froome.

The Vélo d'Or isn't just based on results, but how you achieved those results. Crashing out in the Tour with a bad injury but still being able to win the Vuelta like he did is an inspiring story. A story journalists can appreciate. And I fail to see how Quintana's season was better than Contador's in 2014.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re: Re:

Wasn't Contador considered to have had the best season in 2014 on this forum?

Because there was nobody else who had a better season.

Nibali only won in the Tour and no one dominated the classics.

Funny how a guy can win the Velo d' Or by only winning a couple of warmup races and some b-grade race over in Spain nobody cares about then.

You make it seem like Quintana has done could be done by everyone. You are downplaying it miserably despite it actually, on paper, was better than Contador's 2014 season.

Contador crashed out in the Tour, that he very well could have won. Quintana was miserable in the main goal of his season. Can you see the difference?

Also, nobody had a stellar year in 2014. In 2016 we have two cyclists who are having spectacular season. Quintana isn't competing against 2014 Contador for the Vélo d'Or, but 2016 Sagan and Froome.

The Vélo d'Or isn't just based on results, but how you achieved those results. Crashing out in the Tour with a bad injury but still being able to win the Vuelta like he did is an inspiring story. A story journalists can appreciate.

That depends on how you look at it. I don't want to compensate Contador for the crash in 2014, nor GVA in 2016. Its the results that counts, not if you woulda/coulda won a certain race. I choose to look at Quintana's TdF 2016 as rather impressive to get a podium despite how miserably he was.

Thats not my point either. Obviously, Sagan and Froome have had a greater season that Quintana, no question. Quintana is at a tied 3rd with GVA at this moment. The problem I have is you downplay Quintana's results so incredible much because you simply don't like him. Its so obvious.

 

[yaco]

Reckon if you asked the peleton that Sagan would win hands down.

 

[PremierAndrew]

If Froome hadn't bettered Quintana's 1-3, this would have gone down as an iconic season by Quintana in the modern era, even without all his other stage race victories. Arguably the best performance in consecutive grand Tours since Pantani (excluding Froome this season ofc)

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re:

If Froome hadn't bettered Quintana's 1-3, this would have gone down as an iconic season by Quintana in the modern era, even without all his other stage race victories. Arguably the best performance in consecutive grand Tours since Pantani (excluding Froome this season ofc)

No, Quintana has only won a few training races and a GT nobody cares about. And while we are at it, lets downgrade his 3rd to a 7th place just because he was terrible in TdF and we don't like him.
At least thats what El Pistolero thinks.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

Wasn't Contador considered to have had the best season in 2014 on this forum?

Because there was nobody else who had a better season.

Nibali only won in the Tour and no one dominated the classics.

Funny how a guy can win the Velo d' Or by only winning a couple of warmup races and some b-grade race over in Spain nobody cares about then.

You make it seem like Quintana has done could be done by everyone. You are downplaying it miserably despite it actually, on paper, was better than Contador's 2014 season.

Contador crashed out in the Tour, that he very well could have won. Quintana was miserable in the main goal of his season. Can you see the difference?

Also, nobody had a stellar year in 2014. In 2016 we have two cyclists who are having spectacular season. Quintana isn't competing against 2014 Contador for the Vélo d'Or, but 2016 Sagan and Froome.

The Vélo d'Or isn't just based on results, but how you achieved those results. Crashing out in the Tour with a bad injury but still being able to win the Vuelta like he did is an inspiring story. A story journalists can appreciate.

That depends on how you look at it. I don't want to compensate Contador for the crash in 2014, nor GVA in 2016. Its the results that counts, not if you woulda/coulda won a certain race. I choose to look at Quintana's TdF 2016 as rather impressive to get a podium despite how miserably he was.

Thats not my point either. Obviously, Sagan and Froome have had a greater season that Quintana, no question. Quintana is at a tied 3rd with GVA at this moment. The problem I have is you downplay Quintana's results so incredible much because you simply don't like him. Its so obvious.

I dislike Froome a lot more than Quintana, so that's not the reason I'm downplaying Quintana. I rate Quintana below GVA because he was terrible in the Tour this year. The one race he should've peaked for.

And Olympic Gold in the road race > Vuelta.
Winning a stage in the Tour plus a couple of days yellow > an anonymous third place in the Tour

 

[Brullnux]

Re: Re:

Wasn't Contador considered to have had the best season in 2014 on this forum?

Because there was nobody else who had a better season.

Nibali only won in the Tour and no one dominated the classics.

Funny how a guy can win the Velo d' Or by only winning a couple of warmup races and some b-grade race over in Spain nobody cares about then.

You make it seem like Quintana has done could be done by everyone. You are downplaying it miserably despite it actually, on paper, was better than Contador's 2014 season.

On paper it's better but in real life I'd say Contador was better. Actually on paper it's pretty even:

2nd in Algarve vs 3rd in San Luis
Quintana worked for Dayer here, but still finished 3rd. Very impressive, but Contador at Algarve came second. So (on paper) Contador 1-0 Quintana

Win in Tirreno vs Win in Catalunya
Their respective March victories, Contador won this race in unbelievable style. Quintana out climbed Contador on the queen stage and this proved to be crucial. Tirreno for me is more important than Catalunya (debatable, but Contador also won 2 stages compared to Nairo's 0) so Contador 2-0 Quintana

2nd in Catalunya vs 3rd in Pais Vasco
Close. I'd say Quintana, just, because I rate Pais Vasco higher than Catalunya. But this is very very close, and many understandably would say Contador. Quintana had that very impressive TT though. Contador 2-1 Quintana

Win in Pais Vasco vs Win in Romandie
Contador wins, no question Contador 3-1 Quintana

2nd in Dauphine vs Win in Route du Sud
Contador. Contador 4-1 Quintana

DNF in Tour vs 3rd in Tour
Quintana takes this, by default really. Had Bertie finished then he would've won, probably. Contador 4-3 Quintana (Tour was main goal for both so is worth double)

Win in Vuelta vs Win in Vuelta
Basically a draw. Contador has one more stage win I guess. But very close. I'll give it a draw. Contador 5.5-4.5 Quintana

Ofc, the double GT thing is very good, but Contador's early season was a lot better. Quintana was very good this season and battles for GvA for third but I'd say Contador's season was very slightly. better.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Your dislike for Quintana doesn't have any impact on how you rate his season then? Thats news for me. I don't think you are being fair to him.

Its fair that you rate GVA higher, I don't have any problem with that. They are about equal. Its the rhetoric thats pissing me slightly off - at least give him some credit.

 

[Flamin]

Re: Re:

How anyone can rate Quintana's season over Sagan's is beyond me... It goes to show you how underrated one-day specialists are. And winning the green jersey also seems to be an underrated achievement just because Sagan has won it 5 times in a row. 2 more and he'll have a record.

Quintana only won some prep races and a consolation race this year. Color me not impressed. Is he in the top 5 this year? Yes... but he still failed in his biggest goal of the season.

I think I would rate Sagan's season higher but I understand people who don't. A GT win, even if it's "only" the vuelta is worth way more than the Ronde, a gc podium in the tour is probably more important than a green jersey, and Quintana's two world tour stage races are worth more than Sagan's two more world tour one day races. The reason why I would still rate Sagan's season higher is his high number of stage wins in different races and his European Champion title, while Quintana's "only" additional win was the Rud du Sud. I personally prefer Sagan's season but I think objectively they are even.

Sagan didn't just win de Ronde. He destroyed everyone. Neither did he just win the green jersey (and 3 stages) in the Tour. He destroyed everyone. Unlike Quintana. That's what matters and that's why only in some crazy deluded world, Quintana had an equally good year as Sagan.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re: Re:

How anyone can rate Quintana's season over Sagan's is beyond me... It goes to show you how underrated one-day specialists are. And winning the green jersey also seems to be an underrated achievement just because Sagan has won it 5 times in a row. 2 more and he'll have a record.

Quintana only won some prep races and a consolation race this year. Color me not impressed. Is he in the top 5 this year? Yes... but he still failed in his biggest goal of the season.

I think I would rate Sagan's season higher but I understand people who don't. A GT win, even if it's "only" the vuelta is worth way more than the Ronde, a gc podium in the tour is probably more important than a green jersey, and Quintana's two world tour stage races are worth more than Sagan's two more world tour one day races. The reason why I would still rate Sagan's season higher is his high number of stage wins in different races and his European Champion title, while Quintana's "only" additional win was the Rud du Sud. I personally prefer Sagan's season but I think objectively they are even.

Sagan didn't just win de Ronde. He destroyed everyone. Neither did he just win the green jersey (and 3 stages) in the Tour. He destroyed everyone. Unlike Quintana. That's what matters and that's why only in some crazy deluded world, Quintana had an equally good year as Sagan.

Agree, Sagan's season is on another level, so is Froome's.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re:

Your dislike for Quintana doesn't have any impact on how you rate his season then? Thats news for me. I don't think you are being fair to him.

Its fair that you rate GVA higher, I don't have any problem with that. They are about equal. Its the rhetoric thats pissing me slightly off - at least give him some credit.

I'll give him credit the day he rides the Tour like a champ instead of waiting before it's too late (or simply not being good enough).

At least he reacted on Contador's attack in the Vuelta this year, but he didn't instigate it. That's the racing attitude he needs to have. That's what won him the Vuelta. He can't always count on someone like Contador being around though. The day he pulls of a move like Contador or Nibali is the day I'll start praising him.

 

[Echoes]

Point classification at the Tour of France, just like in any stage races is not underrated. It's overrated.

If you consider a stage win as a great performance (which in itself is already an overrating re: flat stages), you should never consider a final point classification as a great performance, since stage wins are instrumental in winning a point classification. So it's almost like you are judging twice the same achievement. A bit as thoufh I said Ferdi Kübler made a great achievement by winning the Tryptique ardennais beside winning the Arrow and Liège. The point classification is really anecdotal. Few riders are really interested in it.

I'd also rate the Tour of Flanders easier than most other classics. Sagan won two of the easiest spring classics, actually (and two of the easiest late season single-day races). Amstel Gold is way harder than Flanders (every cyclotourists who've ever climbed both kinds of hills will tell you). Needless to say, the Rio route was incomparably harder !!!

 

[saganboss]

Point classification at the Tour of France, just like in any stage races is not underrated. It's overrated.

If you consider a stage win as a great performance (which in itself is already an overrating re: flat stages), you should never consider a final point classification as a great performance, since stage wins are instrumental in winning a point classification. So it's almost like you are judging twice the same achievement. A bit as thoufh I said Ferdi Kübler made a great achievement by winning the Tryptique ardennais beside winning the Arrow and Liège. The point classification is really anecdotal. Few riders are really interested in it.

I'd also rate the Tour of Flanders easier than most other classics. Sagan won two of the easiest spring classics, actually (and two of the easiest late season single-day races). Amstel Gold is way harder than Flanders (every cyclotourists who've ever climbed both kinds of hills will tell you). Needless to say, the Rio route was incomparably harder !!!

so in your opinion, sagan's win in plumelec is more important than other wins because it was a harder parcours. also why in the world would it matter how hard a race was if it still finishes in a sprint. and you should know that flanders is not just a classic , is a monument

 

[saganboss]

also echoes maybe in your opinion winning green is tdf is overrated. if is that easy to win green jersey where is greg. he fights for 1-2 stages and that's it, sagan finished in top 10 in half of the stages, he had 6-7 podiums, if you think that's overrated then it's your problem.

 

[Flamin]

After the Vuelta, I think it was a close call because what Froome did was superb. But Sagan just comes back on an amazing level every single time after a short break and continues winning as if it's nothing. That's why he has the edge over Froome for me.

For Greg all pieces finally came together and nobody deserved a big win more than him, but even if I like him a lot, I can honestly say Quintana had the better year. Already strong in the spring, then a Tour podium (though nothing spectacular) and a Vuelta win against Froome. Meanwhile Greg kind of had the 'luck' he lacked during basically his entire career. Tirreno mountains cancelled, freedom in the Tour to take yellow, Nibali/Henao crash in Rio... Things could have looked a lot different even with the same legs.

Great year nonetheless, beating Sagan on more than one occasion, but therefore slightly below Nairito.

1 Sagan
2 Froome

3 Quintana
4 GVA

 

[PremierAndrew]

Ok pistolero, let me write a post in your style explaining why Froome > Sagan and Quintana > GVA

Sagan's won one monument all season, and that was with his biggest competition, GVA, absent, so it doesn't really count. Apart from that he's won a bunch of irrelevant races that nobody cares about. He only won the green jersey at the Tour because the organisers favour him with the points system. Real cyclists should be able to climb as well, not just get dropped over cat 1 climbs, so the green jersey really should go to a guy like Froome, who can climb, descend, do well on short punchy stuff, echelons and TTs.

GVA has also only won a bunch of small races, and his only big win of the season was at the olympic road race, which he won due to crashes any way.

Meanwhile, Froome and Quintana have won a grand tour, the biggest races in road cycling, each as well as podiuming another.

In fact you know what, I'm so blinded by bias that I'm going to say Chaves also had a better season than Sagan and GVA after podiuming two GTs as well

 

[Miburo]

I think you can make a case for the 4 riders.

It's really hard imo

 

[Escarabajo]

I'd rate Sagan very high just like Froome's season as well.

I rate the podium in the Tour higher than the points classification, IMHO. Podium is very hard to get whether you like or not the rider.

I am GT oriented, so I could be bias, but I remember the podiums from the riders at the Tour. Not all but many until the 80's.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re:

Ok pistolero, let me write a post in your style explaining why Froome > Sagan and Quintana > GVA

Sagan's won one monument all season, and that was with his biggest competition, GVA, absent, so it doesn't really count. Apart from that he's won a bunch of irrelevant races that nobody cares about. He only won the green jersey at the Tour because the organisers favour him with the points system. Real cyclists should be able to climb as well, not just get dropped over cat 1 climbs, so the green jersey really should go to a guy like Froome, who can climb, descend, do well on short punchy stuff, echelons and TTs.

GVA has also only won a bunch of small races, and his only big win of the season was at the olympic road race, which he won due to crashes any way.

Meanwhile, Froome and Quintana have won a grand tour, the biggest races in road cycling, each as well as podiuming another.

In fact you know what, I'm so blinded by bias that I'm going to say Chaves also had a better season than Sagan and GVA after podiuming two GTs as well

Lol, first of all, the points competition rules are made to favour one-trick ponies like Kittel and Cavendish. You get less points for hilly stages than for sprint stages. There are also far more flat stages than hilly stages. If every stage gave an equal amount of points Sagan would have won with an even bigger advantage than he already has.

Ps: Froome won a Tour where Contador crashed out, Nibali and Valverde already rode the Giro (and Nibali was aiming for the Olympics instead) and Quintana was out of shape. By your own argument Froome's Tour isn't worth anything. Certainly a lot less than Sagan's as only one top favorite crashed out there. The Tour-Vuelta double is nothing remarkable in my opinion. If Armstrong cared he'd have won the Tour-Vuelta double many times. If Indurain gave a *** about the Vuelta he'd have also done it. But guess what, he's Spanish and stil didn't care about the Vuelta! Come back to me when Quintana and Froome do a Giro-Tour double. Carlos Sastre, who Armstrong called a joke winner of the Tour, was first in the Tour and third in the Vuelta in 2008. And he was nowhere near the best GT rider of his generation. He didn't even win the Vélo d'Or that year! Contador won it, ahead of Fabian Cancellara (second) and Sastre (third).

And there are far bigger races in cycling than the Vuelta. Someone like Nibali already went on the record saying that he considers the rainbow jersey more prestigious than a Vuelta win. I'm sure many riders think the same of Olympic Gold.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re:

I'd rate Sagan very high just like Froome's season as well.

I rate the podium in the Tour higher than the points classification, IMHO. Podium is very hard to get whether you like or not the rider.

I am GT oriented, so I could be bias, but I remember the podiums from the riders at the Tour. Not all but many until the 80's.

You think winning the green jersey isn't hard? One bad sprint can ruin your chances. Did you not see Sagan go into breakaways on mountainous stages just to win the intermediate sprint (and to help Majka win a stage/polkadots jersey). You're basically saying Quintana did better than Sagan at this year's Tour.

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

Wasn't Contador considered to have had the best season in 2014 on this forum?

Because there was nobody else who had a better season.

Nibali only won in the Tour and no one dominated the classics.

Yes, there was. And you know damn well who that was!

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re: Re:

Lol, first of all, the points competition rules are made to favour one-trick ponies like Kittel and Cavendish. You get less points for hilly stages than for sprint stages. There are also far more flat stages than hilly stages. If every stage gave an equal amount of points Sagan would have won with an even bigger advantage than he already has.

I'm well aware of how it works tyvm. Just goes to show though that if you're biased and unwilling to be rational, there's a way to discredit any achievement

Ps: Froome won a Tour where Contador crashed out, Nibali and Valverde already rode the Giro (and Nibali was aiming for the Olympics instead) and Quintana was out of shape. By your own argument Froome's Tour isn't worth anything. Certainly a lot less than Sagan's as only one top favorite crashed out there

Yeah, Contador crashed out, so Froome's Tour win is kinda asterisked, but Contador wasn't the favourite to win overall at the point that he crashed out (unlike Landa and Kruijswijk at this year's Giro, Anton at the 2010 Vuelta, and Froome/Contador at the 2014 Tour). It's more comparable to the 2013 Giro where Nibali was probably the favourite even before Wiggins' crash. But anyway, Froome has proved time and time again over the past few years that he's the best stage racer out there right now.

The Tour-Vuelta double is nothing remarkable in my opinion. If Armstrong cared he'd have won the Tour-Vuelta double many times. If Indurain gave a **** about the Vuelta he'd have also done it. But guess what, he's Spanish and stil didn't care about the Vuelta! Come back to me when Quintana and Froome do a Giro-Tour double. Carlos Sastre, who Armstrong called a joke winner of the Tour, was first in the Tour and third in the Vuelta in 2008. And he was nowhere near the best GT rider of his generation. He didn't even win the Vélo d'Or that year! Contador won it, ahead of Fabian Cancellara (second) and Sastre (third).

And there are far bigger races in cycling than the Vuelta. Someone like Nibali already went on the record saying that he considers the rainbow jersey more prestigious than a Vuelta win. I'm sure many riders think the same of Olympic Gold.

Look at the Vuelta fields in Indurain's era, and look at the Vuelta fields now. The past 5 editions of the Vuelta have been absolutely stacked. If you go back 10 years, I'd also agree that the WC RR was a bigger achievement than the Vuelta. But those days are gone.

Yeah, none of the top guys make the Vuelta their primary goal of the season, but going by that logic absolutely noone makes Strade, AGR, FW, E3, Omloop, Canada etc their top goals.

And you say Nibali values WCRR over Vuelta. Well Froome clearly valued a Vuelta over Olympic gold. Unless of course you're trying to tell me that Froome was in better shape at the Olympics than he was at the Vuelta

On that time trial course, he was easily the favourite with Dumoulin's dodgy wrist