Who had the best season in the last 20 years?

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Who had the best season in the last 20 years?

  • Gilbert 2011

    Votes: 47 46.1%
  • Cipollini 2002

    Votes: 2 2.0%
  • Cavendish 2009

    Votes: 5 4.9%
  • Pantani 1998

    Votes: 26 25.5%
  • Cancellara 2008

    Votes: 3 2.9%
  • Boonen 2005

    Votes: 6 5.9%
  • Petacchi 2003 or 2004

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Contador 2008

    Votes: 8 7.8%
  • Zabel 2001

    Votes: 4 3.9%

  • Total voters
    102
Re:

Red Rick said:
This thread.....


You have Pantani. Why bother putting in another GT centered rider? He won the magic double, so any 1 GT season is out by default, and as much as I like to fawn at Alberto Contador, Chris Horner really stopped Nibali from beating that only 5 years later.

Sprinter winning Worlds + classic +stages ain't good enough. Only possible sprinter in is Boonen 2005, and that's because of classics

Why Gilbert would be in is beyond me, it's effectively a season where he wins 1 monument, and one GT stage. Huge bunch of other races ofcourse, but I consider it worse than Cavendish in 2009.

And now I'm gonna barricade the door in case Pisti knows where I live


It's really between Boonen 2005, Sagan 2016 (similar classics seasons) and Pantani 1998. Classic greats winning multiple of the 7 biggest one day races in the world in a season is not unheard of, especially if they have a good sprint. If you add the worlds it becomes a bit more circumstantial, as it's pretty dependent on the worlds course.

The Giro-Tour double is widely considered impossible nowadays. Only once this decade has the best GT rider at the moment even tried it, and he got 1st and 5th, and he was the best GT rider by a huge margin at the time. The best climber of the world tried it this year. He got 2nd and 12th.

With all due respect to how great Boonen's and Sagan's seasons were, I'd take Pantani in a heartbeat any day, in any state.

Any other option is a mockery of the sport.

That's not considering the women's, which I think is a seperate debate entirely, and I only think it should be compared if competition is a lot more equal.
You don't know why Gilbert is in it?! :surprised:
Well, let me tell you why.
Because Gilbert won 18!!! races that year. You need to go dig in the past to find a sprinter who won that much, let alone a puncheur!
Because Gilbert won 5!!! WT Classics that year. The last person who did something similar was freaking Eddy Merckx!
Because he owned every rankings that year, and I think he still has best results in that regard since Jalabert 1995.
Because he dominated the field in unseen manner, such dominance was not seen way before him, and certainly wasn't seen after. Cancellara could make a case, but range of races where he was dominant was very narrow, while Gilbert dominated almost everywhere he showed up. He literally walked on water that year!!!
 
Re: Re:

Blanco said:
Red Rick said:
This thread.....


You have Pantani. Why bother putting in another GT centered rider? He won the magic double, so any 1 GT season is out by default, and as much as I like to fawn at Alberto Contador, Chris Horner really stopped Nibali from beating that only 5 years later.

Sprinter winning Worlds + classic +stages ain't good enough. Only possible sprinter in is Boonen 2005, and that's because of classics

Why Gilbert would be in is beyond me, it's effectively a season where he wins 1 monument, and one GT stage. Huge bunch of other races ofcourse, but I consider it worse than Cavendish in 2009.

And now I'm gonna barricade the door in case Pisti knows where I live


It's really between Boonen 2005, Sagan 2016 (similar classics seasons) and Pantani 1998. Classic greats winning multiple of the 7 biggest one day races in the world in a season is not unheard of, especially if they have a good sprint. If you add the worlds it becomes a bit more circumstantial, as it's pretty dependent on the worlds course.

The Giro-Tour double is widely considered impossible nowadays. Only once this decade has the best GT rider at the moment even tried it, and he got 1st and 5th, and he was the best GT rider by a huge margin at the time. The best climber of the world tried it this year. He got 2nd and 12th.

With all due respect to how great Boonen's and Sagan's seasons were, I'd take Pantani in a heartbeat any day, in any state.

Any other option is a mockery of the sport.

That's not considering the women's, which I think is a seperate debate entirely, and I only think it should be compared if competition is a lot more equal.
You don't know why Gilbert is in it?! :surprised:
Well, let me tell you why.
Because Gilbert won 18!!! races that year. You need to go dig in the past to find a sprinter who won that much, let alone a puncheur!
Because Gilbert won 5!!! WT Classics that year. The last person who did something similar was freaking Eddy Merckx!
Because he owned every rankings that year, and I think he still has best results in that regard since Jalabert 1995.
Because he dominated the field in unseen manner, such dominance was not seen way before him, and certainly wasn't seen after. Cancellara could make a case, but range of races where he was dominant was very narrow, while Gilbert dominated almost everywhere he showed up. He literally walked on water that year!!!
He had the power to make any hill significant. Impressive stuff.
 
Re:

Red Rick said:
This thread.....


You have Pantani. Why bother putting in another GT centered rider? He won the magic double, so any 1 GT season is out by default, and as much as I like to fawn at Alberto Contador, Chris Horner really stopped Nibali from beating that only 5 years later.


The Giro-Tour double is widely considered impossible nowadays. Only once this decade has the best GT rider at the moment even tried it, and he got 1st and 5th, and he was the best GT rider by a huge margin at the time. The best climber of the world tried it this year. He got 2nd and 12th.

With all due respect to how great Boonen's and Sagan's seasons were, I'd take Pantani in a heartbeat any day, in any state.

Any other option is a mockery of the sport.

That's not considering the women's, which I think is a seperate debate entirely, and I only think it should be compared if competition is a lot more equal.
Exactly! Any other selection is a mockery of the sport. The mythical and hallowed double most likely will never be accomplished again.
 
If I have to choose one season, I will also go for Gilbert. While others had better seasons on paper, his dominance and strength was just special. Also only needed a little luck for other races to pan out a little differently.
 
While I agree that Pantani's double trumps any other season on this list, I also feel it needs to be pointed out that he was being well beaten in the Giro until the strongest rider in the race by far fell apart due to issues we can't discuss in this subforum, and he still only won due to a stunt at the second TT that we also can't discuss here, and finally at the Tour the majority of GC contenders dropped out mid race due to even more issues we can't discuss here.

It was an amazing performance, yes, and one for the history books, but it took enormous amounts of coincidence and luck for that performance to be good enough to win the double.

While Gilbert looked dominant but perhaps didn't get the results that he seemed capable of, Pantani didn't seem capable of the results he ended up half achieving, half stumbling into.

As an aside, not many remember this, but Pantani spent the month after the Tour talking about how he was 100% going for the Vuelta and he was definitely going to win the triple. By the time it came around he was too exhausted to start it. Which is no slight on him of course, it's just interesting that he actually wanted to attempt it.
 
Re: Re:

Blanco said:
Red Rick said:
This thread.....


You have Pantani. Why bother putting in another GT centered rider? He won the magic double, so any 1 GT season is out by default, and as much as I like to fawn at Alberto Contador, Chris Horner really stopped Nibali from beating that only 5 years later.

Sprinter winning Worlds + classic +stages ain't good enough. Only possible sprinter in is Boonen 2005, and that's because of classics

Why Gilbert would be in is beyond me, it's effectively a season where he wins 1 monument, and one GT stage. Huge bunch of other races ofcourse, but I consider it worse than Cavendish in 2009.

And now I'm gonna barricade the door in case Pisti knows where I live


It's really between Boonen 2005, Sagan 2016 (similar classics seasons) and Pantani 1998. Classic greats winning multiple of the 7 biggest one day races in the world in a season is not unheard of, especially if they have a good sprint. If you add the worlds it becomes a bit more circumstantial, as it's pretty dependent on the worlds course.

The Giro-Tour double is widely considered impossible nowadays. Only once this decade has the best GT rider at the moment even tried it, and he got 1st and 5th, and he was the best GT rider by a huge margin at the time. The best climber of the world tried it this year. He got 2nd and 12th.

With all due respect to how great Boonen's and Sagan's seasons were, I'd take Pantani in a heartbeat any day, in any state.

Any other option is a mockery of the sport.

That's not considering the women's, which I think is a seperate debate entirely, and I only think it should be compared if competition is a lot more equal.
You don't know why Gilbert is in it?! :surprised:
Well, let me tell you why.
Because Gilbert won 18!!! races that year. You need to go dig in the past to find a sprinter who won that much, let alone a puncheur!
Because Gilbert won 5!!! WT Classics that year. The last person who did something similar was freaking Eddy Merckx!
Because he owned every rankings that year, and I think he still has best results in that regard since Jalabert 1995.
Because he dominated the field in unseen manner, such dominance was not seen way before him, and certainly wasn't seen after. Cancellara could make a case, but range of races where he was dominant was very narrow, while Gilbert dominated almost everywhere he showed up. He literally walked on water that year!!!
I think you are pulling our leg!! :razz:
 
Re:

GuyIncognito said:
While I agree that Pantani's double trumps any other season on this list, I also feel it needs to be pointed out that he was being well beaten in the Giro until the strongest rider in the race by far fell apart due to issues we can't discuss in this subforum, and he still only won due to a stunt at the second TT that we also can't discuss here, and finally at the Tour the majority of GC contenders dropped out mid race due to even more issues we can't discuss here.

It was an amazing performance, yes, and one for the history books, but it took enormous amounts of coincidence and luck for that performance to be good enough to win the double.

While Gilbert looked dominant but perhaps didn't get the results that he seemed capable of, Pantani didn't seem capable of the results he ended up half achieving, half stumbling into.

As an aside, not many remember this, but Pantani spent the month after the Tour talking about how he was 100% going for the Vuelta and he was definitely going to win the triple. By the time it came around he was too exhausted to start it. Which is no slight on him of course, it's just interesting that he actually wanted to attempt it.
Well if it is for clinic issues we wouldn't have this list in the first place! :p
 
Re:

GuyIncognito said:
While I agree that Pantani's double trumps any other season on this list, I also feel it needs to be pointed out that he was being well beaten in the Giro until the strongest rider in the race by far fell apart due to issues we can't discuss in this subforum, and he still only won due to a stunt at the second TT that we also can't discuss here, and finally at the Tour the majority of GC contenders dropped out mid race due to even more issues we can't discuss here.
It's easier to say he cannot be discussed here and should not come up in the poll. The bit about Zulle sounds very ironic to me. It reminds me of Doyle Lonegan (Robert Shaw) in "The Sting" : “I can’t tell anyone he cheats better than me”. :D
 
Re: Re:

Blanco said:
Red Rick said:
This thread.....


You have Pantani. Why bother putting in another GT centered rider? He won the magic double, so any 1 GT season is out by default, and as much as I like to fawn at Alberto Contador, Chris Horner really stopped Nibali from beating that only 5 years later.

Sprinter winning Worlds + classic +stages ain't good enough. Only possible sprinter in is Boonen 2005, and that's because of classics

Why Gilbert would be in is beyond me, it's effectively a season where he wins 1 monument, and one GT stage. Huge bunch of other races ofcourse, but I consider it worse than Cavendish in 2009.

And now I'm gonna barricade the door in case Pisti knows where I live


It's really between Boonen 2005, Sagan 2016 (similar classics seasons) and Pantani 1998. Classic greats winning multiple of the 7 biggest one day races in the world in a season is not unheard of, especially if they have a good sprint. If you add the worlds it becomes a bit more circumstantial, as it's pretty dependent on the worlds course.

The Giro-Tour double is widely considered impossible nowadays. Only once this decade has the best GT rider at the moment even tried it, and he got 1st and 5th, and he was the best GT rider by a huge margin at the time. The best climber of the world tried it this year. He got 2nd and 12th.

With all due respect to how great Boonen's and Sagan's seasons were, I'd take Pantani in a heartbeat any day, in any state.

Any other option is a mockery of the sport.

That's not considering the women's, which I think is a seperate debate entirely, and I only think it should be compared if competition is a lot more equal.
You don't know why Gilbert is in it?! :surprised:
Well, let me tell you why.
Because Gilbert won 18!!! races that year. You need to go dig in the past to find a sprinter who won that much, let alone a puncheur!
Because Gilbert won 5!!! WT Classics that year. The last person who did something similar was freaking Eddy Merckx!
Because he owned every rankings that year, and I think he still has best results in that regard since Jalabert 1995.
Because he dominated the field in unseen manner, such dominance was not seen way before him, and certainly wasn't seen after. Cancellara could make a case, but range of races where he was dominant was very narrow, while Gilbert dominated almost everywhere he showed up. He literally walked on water that year!!!
Yes. Gilbert was the best in the world at a small niche in the sport and it won him a lot of victories. But that's not a once every 20 year event. That happens every year. He was one of three riders to do that that year, a year later there were another 3 who did a similar thing.

He won a large quantity of races, riders do that every year. He won one monument, and a bunch of other big races. He did not win a GT, no WT stage races, only one GT stage. I think it's debatable whether that's that much better than what Cavendish did in the same year. He definitely takes the cake in terms of biggest victory that year, and he also won 8 GT stages that year, as well as the Green jersey.


GuyIncognito said:
While I agree that Pantani's double trumps any other season on this list, I also feel it needs to be pointed out that he was being well beaten in the Giro until the strongest rider in the race by far fell apart due to issues we can't discuss in this subforum, and he still only won due to a stunt at the second TT that we also can't discuss here, and finally at the Tour the majority of GC contenders dropped out mid race due to even more issues we can't discuss here.

It was an amazing performance, yes, and one for the history books, but it took enormous amounts of coincidence and luck for that performance to be good enough to win the double.

While Gilbert looked dominant but perhaps didn't get the results that he seemed capable of, Pantani didn't seem capable of the results he ended up half achieving, half stumbling into.

As an aside, not many remember this, but Pantani spent the month after the Tour talking about how he was 100% going for the Vuelta and he was definitely going to win the triple. By the time it came around he was too exhausted to start it. Which is no slight on him of course, it's just interesting that he actually wanted to attempt it.
Every situation is a unique set of circumstances. What happened to Pantani after the double is irrelevant, apart from the fact that he won no big races anymore.
 
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
Blanco said:
Red Rick said:
This thread.....


You have Pantani. Why bother putting in another GT centered rider? He won the magic double, so any 1 GT season is out by default, and as much as I like to fawn at Alberto Contador, Chris Horner really stopped Nibali from beating that only 5 years later.

Sprinter winning Worlds + classic +stages ain't good enough. Only possible sprinter in is Boonen 2005, and that's because of classics

Why Gilbert would be in is beyond me, it's effectively a season where he wins 1 monument, and one GT stage. Huge bunch of other races ofcourse, but I consider it worse than Cavendish in 2009.

And now I'm gonna barricade the door in case Pisti knows where I live


It's really between Boonen 2005, Sagan 2016 (similar classics seasons) and Pantani 1998. Classic greats winning multiple of the 7 biggest one day races in the world in a season is not unheard of, especially if they have a good sprint. If you add the worlds it becomes a bit more circumstantial, as it's pretty dependent on the worlds course.

The Giro-Tour double is widely considered impossible nowadays. Only once this decade has the best GT rider at the moment even tried it, and he got 1st and 5th, and he was the best GT rider by a huge margin at the time. The best climber of the world tried it this year. He got 2nd and 12th.

With all due respect to how great Boonen's and Sagan's seasons were, I'd take Pantani in a heartbeat any day, in any state.

Any other option is a mockery of the sport.

That's not considering the women's, which I think is a seperate debate entirely, and I only think it should be compared if competition is a lot more equal.
You don't know why Gilbert is in it?! :surprised:
Well, let me tell you why.
Because Gilbert won 18!!! races that year. You need to go dig in the past to find a sprinter who won that much, let alone a puncheur!
Because Gilbert won 5!!! WT Classics that year. The last person who did something similar was freaking Eddy Merckx!
Because he owned every rankings that year, and I think he still has best results in that regard since Jalabert 1995.
Because he dominated the field in unseen manner, such dominance was not seen way before him, and certainly wasn't seen after. Cancellara could make a case, but range of races where he was dominant was very narrow, while Gilbert dominated almost everywhere he showed up. He literally walked on water that year!!!
Yes. Gilbert was the best in the world at a small niche in the sport and it won him a lot of victories. But that's not a once every 20 year event. That happens every year. He was one of three riders to do that that year, a year later there were another 3 who did a similar thing.

He won a large quantity of races, riders do that every year. He won one monument, and a bunch of other big races. He did not win a GT, no WT stage races, only one GT stage. I think it's debatable whether that's that much better than what Cavendish did in the same year. He definitely takes the cake in terms of biggest victory that year, and he also won 8 GT stages that year, as well as the Green jersey.


GuyIncognito said:
While I agree that Pantani's double trumps any other season on this list, I also feel it needs to be pointed out that he was being well beaten in the Giro until the strongest rider in the race by far fell apart due to issues we can't discuss in this subforum, and he still only won due to a stunt at the second TT that we also can't discuss here, and finally at the Tour the majority of GC contenders dropped out mid race due to even more issues we can't discuss here.

It was an amazing performance, yes, and one for the history books, but it took enormous amounts of coincidence and luck for that performance to be good enough to win the double.

While Gilbert looked dominant but perhaps didn't get the results that he seemed capable of, Pantani didn't seem capable of the results he ended up half achieving, half stumbling into.

As an aside, not many remember this, but Pantani spent the month after the Tour talking about how he was 100% going for the Vuelta and he was definitely going to win the triple. By the time it came around he was too exhausted to start it. Which is no slight on him of course, it's just interesting that he actually wanted to attempt it.
Every situation is a unique set of circumstances. What happened to Pantani after the double is irrelevant, apart from the fact that he won no big races anymore.
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean.
"After the double", do you mean the 1998 Vuelta? I mentioned that as an aside, only as a curiosity. My opinion on Pantani's 1998 season is in the previous 3 paragraphs.
 
It's not for every year in the book that you can say that at every race other riders were stronger but dropped out due to circumstances outside their control :)

In fact, I can think of very few.
To have a season that can be the best in a 20 year period and not be the best in those races, I would say it's extraordinary luck.

That said, remember my very first line. I agree that Pantani 1998 has the best results of any season in the poll.
 

Singer01

BANNED
Nov 18, 2013
2,043
2
5,485
This thread made me go back and look at Merckx year by year results, his 4th or 5th best years trumps anything anybody has done for 20 years.

In fact there is a very good argument to say that his triple crown year wasn't even his best, a more interesting discussion is which was his best year?
 
Re:

Singer01 said:
In fact there is a very good argument to say that his triple crown year wasn't even his best, a more interesting discussion is which was his best year?
Does the first part mean 1974? It was his first season without any spring classic win, actually without any classic win at all if you don't consider the Worlds as a classic. So for sure, it was not his best. Of course he had a lot of health issues during that spring but also in summer. Actually every year he had health issues.

The peak of the peaks of his career is widely seen as 1972. The one with the Hour record as a "cherry on the cake" to an already amazing season.

My own favourite is 1975, a little masterpiece in every spring classic. Especially the Tour of Flanders.
 
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
Blanco said:
Red Rick said:
This thread.....


You have Pantani. Why bother putting in another GT centered rider? He won the magic double, so any 1 GT season is out by default, and as much as I like to fawn at Alberto Contador, Chris Horner really stopped Nibali from beating that only 5 years later.

Sprinter winning Worlds + classic +stages ain't good enough. Only possible sprinter in is Boonen 2005, and that's because of classics

Why Gilbert would be in is beyond me, it's effectively a season where he wins 1 monument, and one GT stage. Huge bunch of other races ofcourse, but I consider it worse than Cavendish in 2009.

And now I'm gonna barricade the door in case Pisti knows where I live


It's really between Boonen 2005, Sagan 2016 (similar classics seasons) and Pantani 1998. Classic greats winning multiple of the 7 biggest one day races in the world in a season is not unheard of, especially if they have a good sprint. If you add the worlds it becomes a bit more circumstantial, as it's pretty dependent on the worlds course.

The Giro-Tour double is widely considered impossible nowadays. Only once this decade has the best GT rider at the moment even tried it, and he got 1st and 5th, and he was the best GT rider by a huge margin at the time. The best climber of the world tried it this year. He got 2nd and 12th.

With all due respect to how great Boonen's and Sagan's seasons were, I'd take Pantani in a heartbeat any day, in any state.

Any other option is a mockery of the sport.

That's not considering the women's, which I think is a seperate debate entirely, and I only think it should be compared if competition is a lot more equal.
You don't know why Gilbert is in it?! :surprised:
Well, let me tell you why.
Because Gilbert won 18!!! races that year. You need to go dig in the past to find a sprinter who won that much, let alone a puncheur!
Because Gilbert won 5!!! WT Classics that year. The last person who did something similar was freaking Eddy Merckx!
Because he owned every rankings that year, and I think he still has best results in that regard since Jalabert 1995.
Because he dominated the field in unseen manner, such dominance was not seen way before him, and certainly wasn't seen after. Cancellara could make a case, but range of races where he was dominant was very narrow, while Gilbert dominated almost everywhere he showed up. He literally walked on water that year!!!
Yes. Gilbert was the best in the world at a small niche in the sport and it won him a lot of victories. But that's not a once every 20 year event. That happens every year. He was one of three riders to do that that year, a year later there were another 3 who did a similar thing.

He won a large quantity of races, riders do that every year. He won one monument, and a bunch of other big races. He did not win a GT, no WT stage races, only one GT stage. I think it's debatable whether that's that much better than what Cavendish did in the same year. He definitely takes the cake in terms of biggest victory that year, and he also won 8 GT stages that year, as well as the Green jersey.


GuyIncognito said:
While I agree that Pantani's double trumps any other season on this list, I also feel it needs to be pointed out that he was being well beaten in the Giro until the strongest rider in the race by far fell apart due to issues we can't discuss in this subforum, and he still only won due to a stunt at the second TT that we also can't discuss here, and finally at the Tour the majority of GC contenders dropped out mid race due to even more issues we can't discuss here.

It was an amazing performance, yes, and one for the history books, but it took enormous amounts of coincidence and luck for that performance to be good enough to win the double.

While Gilbert looked dominant but perhaps didn't get the results that he seemed capable of, Pantani didn't seem capable of the results he ended up half achieving, half stumbling into.

As an aside, not many remember this, but Pantani spent the month after the Tour talking about how he was 100% going for the Vuelta and he was definitely going to win the triple. By the time it came around he was too exhausted to start it. Which is no slight on him of course, it's just interesting that he actually wanted to attempt it.
Every situation is a unique set of circumstances. What happened to Pantani after the double is irrelevant, apart from the fact that he won no big races anymore.
I couldn't disagree more. You're comparing Cavendish with Gilbert 2011?! Gilbert was two light years ahead of everybody that year, and Cav wasn't even the 2nd best, it was Evans.
Gilbert won 18 races vs Cav's 11. Puncheur vs sprinter! I think that's all we need to know.

And what happens every year, that puncheur, a classic specialist wins 18 races, 9 WT races, 5 big classics?! Name me one year in last 20 when that happened! Not even Valverde who has a far superior sprint to Gilbert could achieve that. Heck I think not even Sagan, who can still sprint with the best, can do that! Van Avermaet won 7 races this year, Kwiatkowski 4, and their seasons already are massive. Compared that to freaking 18!

You keep talking that Pantani did something memorable, something that was not achieved since. And I agree, it was big, it was very big. But it was not bigger than Gilbert 2011. Six guys did that before him, some of them maybe even weren't the best riders of the season (Indurain 1993 vs Fondriest and Rominger). But Gilbert did something no one did since Merckx, and something no one did before Merckx. He won 5 classics of the highest level in one season! No one did that except Eddy. Van Looy didn't do that, De Vlaeminck didn't, Moser, Kelly, Museeuw, Bettini, Boonen, Cancellara, no one!!!

It was a once in 20 years season definitely!
 
Singer01 said:
Screecher said:
Best season(s) in recent history : Peter Sagan 2016 - 3215 PCS points and Philippe Gilbert 2011 - 3086 PCS points. Any other season in the last 20 years should be below 3000 points.
Sagan secures so many points through consistency and being competitive in many different types of race. However GV, ToF and WC alone as big wins doesn't make it the best year in the last 20, unless you consider consistency more important than victories. Wiggins (who didn't even make the list) won PN, Dauphine, Romandie, TdF and OG TT. The fact that he isn't in the options is testament to the ridiculous bias this board has against Sky.
+1
Couldn't have put it better.
 
Re: Re:

Blanco said:
Ruby United said:
Valv.Piti said:
Catwhoorg said:
Parker said:
Probably Wiggins in 2012
This.
IMO the most overrated season. Wiggins got carried by the route design and his superior team through pretty much every race he won.
Completely irrelevant (and wrong anyways.)
Who cares?
We are looking at palmares - at who has the best results.

Gilbert 2011 and Wiggins 2012 are joint winners for me (Gilbert probably edges it):

Wiggins 2012:
1st Tour de France - 2 stages
1st Olympics - TT
1st Paris Nice - 1 stage, points classification
1st Tour of Romandie - 2 stages
1st Criterium du Dauphine - 1 stage
2nd UCI WT
2nd CQ Rankings
Guy with the best season in the last 20 years should at least win respective rankings in that same year!
It is much harder for primarily GC riders, such as Wiggins or Froome, to win these types of rankings then more versatile riders who consistently do well in numerous races such as Valverde, Sagan or even Purito.
 
Coming to think of it, though, Cav's 2011 was pretty remarkable and should definitely be up there as some others have pointed out.

1st World Championships
5 Tour stages
Tour Green Jersey
3 Giro Stages
Giro Pink (leaders) Jersey (for a day)
And several other sprint victories

However, it still goes (best to worst) Gilbert 2011 - Wiggins 2012 - Pantani 1998 for me
 
Re: Re:

Blanco said:
Red Rick said:
Blanco said:
Red Rick said:
This thread.....


You have Pantani. Why bother putting in another GT centered rider? He won the magic double, so any 1 GT season is out by default, and as much as I like to fawn at Alberto Contador, Chris Horner really stopped Nibali from beating that only 5 years later.

Sprinter winning Worlds + classic +stages ain't good enough. Only possible sprinter in is Boonen 2005, and that's because of classics

Why Gilbert would be in is beyond me, it's effectively a season where he wins 1 monument, and one GT stage. Huge bunch of other races ofcourse, but I consider it worse than Cavendish in 2009.

And now I'm gonna barricade the door in case Pisti knows where I live


It's really between Boonen 2005, Sagan 2016 (similar classics seasons) and Pantani 1998. Classic greats winning multiple of the 7 biggest one day races in the world in a season is not unheard of, especially if they have a good sprint. If you add the worlds it becomes a bit more circumstantial, as it's pretty dependent on the worlds course.

The Giro-Tour double is widely considered impossible nowadays. Only once this decade has the best GT rider at the moment even tried it, and he got 1st and 5th, and he was the best GT rider by a huge margin at the time. The best climber of the world tried it this year. He got 2nd and 12th.

With all due respect to how great Boonen's and Sagan's seasons were, I'd take Pantani in a heartbeat any day, in any state.

Any other option is a mockery of the sport.

That's not considering the women's, which I think is a seperate debate entirely, and I only think it should be compared if competition is a lot more equal.
You don't know why Gilbert is in it?! :surprised:
Well, let me tell you why.
Because Gilbert won 18!!! races that year. You need to go dig in the past to find a sprinter who won that much, let alone a puncheur!
Because Gilbert won 5!!! WT Classics that year. The last person who did something similar was freaking Eddy Merckx!
Because he owned every rankings that year, and I think he still has best results in that regard since Jalabert 1995.
Because he dominated the field in unseen manner, such dominance was not seen way before him, and certainly wasn't seen after. Cancellara could make a case, but range of races where he was dominant was very narrow, while Gilbert dominated almost everywhere he showed up. He literally walked on water that year!!!
Yes. Gilbert was the best in the world at a small niche in the sport and it won him a lot of victories. But that's not a once every 20 year event. That happens every year. He was one of three riders to do that that year, a year later there were another 3 who did a similar thing.

He won a large quantity of races, riders do that every year. He won one monument, and a bunch of other big races. He did not win a GT, no WT stage races, only one GT stage. I think it's debatable whether that's that much better than what Cavendish did in the same year. He definitely takes the cake in terms of biggest victory that year, and he also won 8 GT stages that year, as well as the Green jersey.


GuyIncognito said:
While I agree that Pantani's double trumps any other season on this list, I also feel it needs to be pointed out that he was being well beaten in the Giro until the strongest rider in the race by far fell apart due to issues we can't discuss in this subforum, and he still only won due to a stunt at the second TT that we also can't discuss here, and finally at the Tour the majority of GC contenders dropped out mid race due to even more issues we can't discuss here.

It was an amazing performance, yes, and one for the history books, but it took enormous amounts of coincidence and luck for that performance to be good enough to win the double.

While Gilbert looked dominant but perhaps didn't get the results that he seemed capable of, Pantani didn't seem capable of the results he ended up half achieving, half stumbling into.

As an aside, not many remember this, but Pantani spent the month after the Tour talking about how he was 100% going for the Vuelta and he was definitely going to win the triple. By the time it came around he was too exhausted to start it. Which is no slight on him of course, it's just interesting that he actually wanted to attempt it.
Every situation is a unique set of circumstances. What happened to Pantani after the double is irrelevant, apart from the fact that he won no big races anymore.
I couldn't disagree more. You're comparing Cavendish with Gilbert 2011?! Gilbert was two light years ahead of everybody that year, and Cav wasn't even the 2nd best, it was Evans.
Gilbert won 18 races vs Cav's 11. Puncheur vs sprinter! I think that's all we need to know.

And what happens every year, that puncheur, a classic specialist wins 18 races, 9 WT races, 5 big classics?! Name me one year in last 20 when that happened! Not even Valverde who has a far superior sprint to Gilbert could achieve that. Heck I think not even Sagan, who can still sprint with the best, can do that! Van Avermaet won 7 races this year, Kwiatkowski 4, and their seasons already are massive. Compared that to freaking 18!

You keep talking that Pantani did something memorable, something that was not achieved since. And I agree, it was big, it was very big. But it was not bigger than Gilbert 2011. Six guys did that before him, some of them maybe even weren't the best riders of the season (Indurain 1993 vs Fondriest and Rominger). But Gilbert did something no one did since Merckx, and something no one did before Merckx. He won 5 classics of the highest level in one season! No one did that except Eddy. Van Looy didn't do that, De Vlaeminck didn't, Moser, Kelly, Museeuw, Bettini, Boonen, Cancellara, no one!!!

It was a once in 20 years season definitely!
So, races like Quebec are up there with the monuments now?

Apart from LBL, AGR, FW, Quebec, Strade and the Tour stage, they're *** small races. and of these only LBL is very big on its own.

GvA, Sagan, Boonen all have had equal if not better seasons at the top end. *** small races don't make the difference.

Gilbert 2011 wasn't much better than Valverde this year, and he crashed out halfway the season.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS