Who is the most versatile rider ?

[Jspear]

How is it versatile if you are very decent at riding a hill very fast?
(and what do you think monuments are, and how many there are?)

There are 5 monuments. MSR, Flanders, PR, LBL, and Lombardia...D. Martin has won LBL and Lombardia.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

OMG 5 pages in and not one single person has mentioned Dan Martin. Won 2 monuments and podiumed at least another 5 and top 10 in the only grand tour he has targeted for GC.

Am I missing something here on why he hasn't even been mentioned?

Can do two monuments (all of his monument results are in Lombardia and LBL, the two he's suited to), and do a GC in a GT specialized towards short-to-mid-length steep climbs. Martin is very good at his trick (even to this day a bit underrated), but if "can do a top 10 in a GT" and "can win hilly Classic" was all it took to be considered versatile, nearly every puncheur for the last quarter century could be considered for it. Andy Schleck (retirement notwithstanding) has won Liège-Bastogne-Liège and the Tour de France, but if I put him forward as an example of a versatile rider...

Now, somebody it is perhaps a bit surprising not to have seen thus far is Sylvain Chavanel, although he's a bit too old now and has fallen behind some of the other names in the thread. After all, he's a contender in the cobbled Classics, has a decent bunch of results in the hilly ones, can contend for the GC of hilly and medium-mountain stage races such as Paris-Nice, and has a good TT on him.

 

[Coat-O]

Spot on, Libertine Seguros.

I'd actually call Dan Martin one of the most specialized riders in the peloton. The hill rider version of Kittel.

 

[samhocking]

Disagree wholeheartedly. He's tried to win Liège and Lombardia with very long solos - in the former case almost successfully. He's raced to be competitive in one-day races, if anything being too gung-ho about it.

I didn't say he didn't try, but to be classed 'most versatile rider' I think you've got to win different types of race. I'm not putting his attributes down as a rider by saying his victories are only stage racing. This is not an example of being a versatile rider in terms of winning different classes of races.

 

[bicifan]

OMG 5 pages in and not one single person has mentioned Dan Martin. Won 2 monuments and podiumed at least another 5 and top 10 in the only grand tour he has targeted for GC.

Am I missing something here on why he hasn't even been mentioned?

My rider Uran is more versatile than yours

 

[samhocking]

I simply used the following criteria and ended up with Valverde:

Won a GT, Stage Race, Monument, Classics/One Days & National Road Race

I couldn't think of another rider who's done all this with actual wins in all of them? He's really only missing World Road Race although has podiumed 4 times too, which is quite impressive with or without 'extra help'.

 

[Carols]

Valverde is the man.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I didn't say he didn't try, but to be classed 'most versatile rider' I think you've got to win different types of race. I'm not putting his attributes down as a rider by saying his victories are only stage racing. This is not an example of being a versatile rider in terms of winning different classes of races.

I was disagreeing with the assertion that for the last 4-5 years he had focused solely on stage races, rather than saying why he should be counted as versatile.

 

[staubsauger]

I know myself it's very strange, but my first thought actually was Yaroslav Popovych.

 

[Erythropoietin]

Valverde. He is good from start to finish of the season. And he delivers every year.

 

[greenedge]

Wiggins, Cancellara, Gilbert, Sagan, Nibali, Valverde, GVA, Kwiatowski, Evans.

From that list I would say Valverde, followed by Cancellara.

 

[staubsauger]

Gilbert, Valverde, Wiggins, Nibali, Rebellin.

 

[mortand]

I know myself it's very strange, but my first thought actually was Yaroslav Popovych.

He's certainly versatile these days. Or in the words of Matteo Bono:

 

[Angliru]

1. Valverde by a mile - able to win a GT (Vuelta 2009) and basically every monument except P-R+ WC + 1 week races . Only weakness - his tactical sense.

2. Kwiatkowski (similar to Valverde but less strong in the real mountains)

3. Gerrans/Sagan

Gerrans is NOT versatile. Where does anyone get that idea?

 

[Angliru]

Of course he's the strongest of his team. That was his first PR in nearly 10 years. Imagine what track record he would have if he focused on the classics since he was 20.

Didn't he ride Roubaix with Vaughters/Slipstream?

 

[grizzlee]

I simply used the following criteria and ended up with Valverde:

Won a GT, Stage Race, Monument, Classics/One Days & National Road Race

I couldn't think of another rider who's done all this with actual wins in all of them? He's really only missing World Road Race although has podiumed 4 times too, which is quite impressive with or without 'extra help'.

Valverde is another Dan Martin. Can do well in gc at a grand tour and wins hilly classics. Whats the difference?

 

[Buffalo Soldier]

I simply used the following criteria and ended up with Valverde:

Won a GT, Stage Race, Monument, Classics/One Days & National Road Race

I couldn't think of another rider who's done all this with actual wins in all of them? He's really only missing World Road Race although has podiumed 4 times too, which is quite impressive with or without 'extra help'.

There's alway's the Vino option

 

[Cance > TheRest]

Disagree wholeheartedly. He's tried to win Liège and Lombardia with very long solos - in the former case almost successfully. He's raced to be competitive in one-day races, if anything being too gung-ho about it.

But he has employed stage race strategies to do so. He doesn't have the punch of JRod/Moreno/Valverde/Gilbert, so focusing on long range attacks is the only way for him. That doesn't make him a great classics specialist - it just makes him a great tactician for knowing how to overcome his lack of punch.
He's also not very good at cobbles, just a very good bikehandler. Had there been zero rain on the cobbled tour stage this year, he wouldn't have gained much time on the other GT-contenders.

 

[samhocking]

Valverde is another Dan Martin. Can do well in gc at a grand tour and wins hilly classics. Whats the difference?

Perhaps actually winning a GT, his Nationals and multiple UCI World Tour/CQ rankings winner and 4x WRRC podiums is the difference? If just coming top 10 is the same as winning, then there's a lot more riders in the mix.

 

[grizzlee]

Perhaps actually winning a GT, his Nationals and multiple UCI World Tour/CQ rankings winner and 4x WRRC podiums is the difference? If just coming top 10 is the same as winning, then there's a lot more riders in the mix.

Im not argueing the point of who is the better rider, im saying they are both exactly the same type of rider suited to the same type of parcour.

Valverde is no more versatile than Dan Martin, he is just better than him at the same thing.

 

[Netserk]

Except that Valverde is a better TTer and sprinter.

 

[samhocking]

Fair enough he is a versatile rider then, just not the most versatile
I would group him with Rodríguez, Sanchez, Costa & Mollema are all surprisingly similar too.

 

[Vesica]

Mathieu van der Poel.

Would him mention as well. Still very young, but can do cross, cobbles, climbing, not such a sprinter I believe.

Kwiatkowski, Valverde are the ones imo

Gerrans...seriously?

 

[Netserk]

Fair enough he is a versatile rider then, just not the most versatile
I would group him with Rodríguez, Sanchez, Costa & Mollema are all surprisingly similar too.

That I absolutely agree with. For me Kwiatkowski is the most versatile rider. I think Sagan and Valverde are close to each other, but for so versatile riders they are quite different.

 

[samhocking]

The way Kwiatkowski is performing he could be the modern day Sean Kelly. Eddy Merckx even, if he can get some GT wins too. Such high level success already and senior career only really just started.