Who is your Men's Rider of the Decade?

Page 16 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Who is the Men's Rider of the Decade

  • Fabian Cancellara

    Votes: 2 1.4%
  • Mark Cavendish

    Votes: 1 0.7%
  • Alberto Contador

    Votes: 9 6.1%
  • Chris Froome

    Votes: 50 33.8%
  • Philippe Gilbert

    Votes: 8 5.4%
  • Marcel Kittel

    Votes: 1 0.7%
  • Vincenzo Nibali

    Votes: 16 10.8%
  • Peter Sagan

    Votes: 48 32.4%
  • Greg Van Avermaet

    Votes: 1 0.7%
  • Alejandro Valverde

    Votes: 12 8.1%

  • Total voters
    148
  • Poll closed .
3 consecutive wins at the WC, 5 consecutive green jerseys that should have been eight. More than 10 TDF stages. At least podium in every classic except Lombardy.

Plus one of the major factors defining Sagan. Not a grey mouse like most of his competition.

Consistency should be key and in that aspect Sagan is the most complete rider.

Sagan doesn't have a podium at Fleche Wallone or LBL.
 
The last couple of years, he has mostly won sprints, that's true, but he has also won
  • Paris-Roubaix in a two-up sprint
  • Flanders solo
  • The World Championships solo
  • Gent-Wevelgem solo
  • Gent-Wevelgem in a four-man sprint
  • E3 Harelbeke in a four-man sprint
  • a Tirreno stage in a three-man sprint (on a very hilly stage in the company of Purito and Nibali)
  • Brabantse Pijl in a sprint, but after toying with Greg and Phil as if they were juniors
  • a Tour stage in a two-man sprint against Froome
  • two Tour de Suisse mountain stages
  • a Tour de Suisse stage in a three-man sprint after humiliating Matthews and the rest of the field
  • Tour of California GC in a race with Mount Baldy and a TT which he won
  • two Paris-Nice stages certainly not in sprints as a 20-year-old (which was special before 2019)
So please relax with your talk about outliers... The guy certainly hasn't just been sprinting through the decade.
 
Last edited:
The last couple of years, he has mostly won sprints, that's true, but he has also won
  • Paris-Roubaix in a two-up sprint
  • Flanders solo
  • The World Championships solo
  • Gent-Wevelgem solo
  • Gent-Wevelgem in a four-man sprint
  • E3 Harelbeke in a four-man sprint
  • a Tirreno stage in a three-man sprint (on a very hilly stage in the company of Purito and Nibali)
  • Brabantse Pijl in a sprint, but after toying with Greg and Phil as if they were juniors
  • a Tour stage in a two-man sprint against Froome
  • two Tour de Suisse mountain stages
  • a Tour de Suisse stage in a three-man sprint after humiliating Matthews and the rest of the field
  • Tour of California GC in a race with Mount Baldy and a TT which he won
  • two Paris-Nice stages certainly not in sprints as a 20-year-old (which was special before 2019)
So please relax with your talk about outliers... The guy certainly hasn't just been sprinting through the decade.
Calling him just a sprinter makes it sound like he just rides in the bunch or behind a train all day which is unfair as we have seen him in way more breaks ,split and solos that any sprinter I can remember
 
Reactions: Salvarani
I mean what's an outlier in the first place? If you have ten apples and one orange, that orange is an outlier, while ten oranges wouldn't be outliers. However if you have 1000 apples, those same 10 oranges most definitely would be outliers again.
In other words, if a guy with 30 wins in his career has 15 wins that didn't come from sprints (which is the number of wins listed above) , I wouldn't say the majority of his success comes from sprinting.

However Sagan has a lot more wins than just 30. And while those 15 wins listed above are ineed impressive you definitely wouldn't put him in this conversation only because of them. He is in this conversation because he undoubtedly has the clear advantage over froome in terms of quantity of wins. And so if you look at quantity there is no way to get around that for Sagan, non sprint wins are more or less outliers.
 
I mean what's an outlier in the first place? If you have ten apples and one orange, that orange is an outlier, while ten oranges wouldn't be outliers. However if you have 1000 apples, those same 10 oranges most definitely would be outliers again.
In other words, if a guy with 30 wins in his career has 15 wins that didn't come from sprints (which is the number of wins listed above) , I wouldn't say the majority of his success comes from sprinting.

However Sagan has a lot more wins than just 30. And while those 15 wins listed above are ineed impressive you definitely wouldn't put him in this conversation only because of them. He is in this conversation because he undoubtedly has the clear advantage over froome in terms of quantity of wins. And so if you look at quantity there is no way to get around that for Sagan, non sprint wins are more or less outliers.
I definitely disagree with that, it's not like his remaining 98 victories have just been from bunch sprints, and I definitely am not going to agree with you (if you want to go there) that puncheur wins of which he has MANY as well are just the same as bunch sprints. This is not 1000 versus 10, it's more like 40 versus 15 and a lot of other wins, muddling the waters.

And thank you for the apples and oranges example, as the concept of an outlier would be too difficult to grasp without taking it down to first grade level....
 
If we are discussing about Sagan as a winner of sprint finishes who hides all day in the bunch, it should be added that also Froome is a GC winner who was hiding most of the time behind his Sky-train. So are we discounting those achievements if they were not earned in the right fighting way?

If yes, then I guess Valverde also in general belongs into "winner after passive riding" category, so that leaves us with Nibali as a rider who won a lot and had to fought the most for his wins..? Is this what you had in mind?
 
Armstrong had 6 Tours and a podium. But I wouldn't imagine him having won.

Maybe Valverde.

Zabel was the only one who got more CQ points in that decade.

But Bettini would probably be the most deserving. 5 monuments, 2 World titles and an Olympic gold medal is pretty hard to compete against.

Boonen would of course also be in the running, especially with his insane 2005 season.
 
And by that metric Armstrong is no doubt much greater than Merckx. It's the worst metric I've heard yet.
No need to compare eras between themselves.

Armstrong was THE cyclist of the 2000s, while Merckx was THE cyclist of the 1970s - in the sense that they dominated almost every dimension of the sport.

That's why I believe Sagan was THE cyclist of the 2010s. The wins, the attitude, the outstanding achievements, the popularity, the power within the peloton... He has all this, on an international scale.

Armstrong had 6 Tours and a podium. But I wouldn't imagine him having won.

Maybe Valverde.

Zabel was the only one who got more CQ points in that decade.

But Bettini would probably be the most deserving. 5 monuments, 2 World titles and an Olympic gold medal is pretty hard to compete against.

Boonen would of course also be in the running, especially with his insane 2005 season.
Armstrong in stage racing, Bettini in one-day racing.
 
Last edited:
The only thing preventing Armstrong from winning such a poll would've been hisTourcentrism.
On the other hand, there hadn't been a rider who dominated the rest of the lot to be placed clearly ahead of Armstrong.

And that gives some perspective to the decade we're voting about, where we have riders with the full set of Grand Tours, 4/5 Monuments + rainbow and record Worlds in a row.
 
The only thing preventing Armstrong from winning such a poll would've been hisTourcentrism.
On the other hand, there hadn't been a rider who dominated the rest of the lot to be placed clearly ahead of Armstrong.

And that gives some perspective to the decade we're voting about, where we have riders with the full set of Grand Tours, 4/5 Monuments + rainbow and record Worlds in a row.
Bettini won 5 of the 7 different biggest one-day races.

Actually, Gilbert did the same in this decade. The more I think about it, the more I think he should be taken more seriously in the conversation. Especially for the people who can't stop talking about "big wins".
 
Reactions: Koronin
Bettini won 5 of the 7 different biggest one-day races.

Actually, Gilbert did the same in this decade. The more I think about it, the more I think he should be taken more seriously in the conversation. Especially for the people who can't stop talking about "big wins".
He has 5 total this decade. Nibs and Froome have 7. Also GTs are bigger, though you could make an argument for WC being as bigger than the Vuelta.

And I'm not sure how versatile to consider it compared to the guys who win both monuments and GTs. Especially Nibs.
 
He has 5 total this decade. Nibs and Froome have 7. Also GTs are bigger, though you could make an argument for WC being as bigger than the Vuelta.

And I'm not sure how versatile to consider it compared to the guys who win both monuments and GTs. Especially Nibs.
It's pretty versatile, I would say.

He's more a collector than other riders in the sense that he doesn't win many races more than once so his total tally isn't very big, but when you take into account that in addition to his 5 different tier one one-day races he also has wins in Strade, Flèche Wallonne, Amstel (no less than 4), San Sebastián and one of the Canadian races, has become national champion both in the road race and in the TT, won stages in all three Grand Tours and worn the yellow jersey, it's difficult to demand much more by a rider who is too heavy to play for GC's.
 
Reactions: Red Rick
Bettini won 5 of the 7 different biggest one-day races.

Actually, Gilbert did the same in this decade. The more I think about it, the more I think he should be taken more seriously in the conversation. Especially for the people who can't stop talking about "big wins".
Should've his total surpassed the number of the biggest one-day races, he could've been a match to Armstrong. This way they'd be equal on Tours to Monuments/Worlds/Olympics (with Armstrong winning another Tour and the WC previously).
No cobbles is a considerable shortcoming in such a poll for a rider of his reputation.
Just like no Monuments off the cobbles would've been for Boonen.
 
Last edited:
I think generally that if you are assessing a rider's 'greatness' across a decade and a career and you need to rely on podiums then you're probably losing the argument.
I guess that makes sense if you're talking about riders who win or podium 5 times a year in 6-8 stage races, most of which aren't terribly prestigious. For riders who race all year in all kinds of races, all year long, where a top rider might win or podium in 50 races a year and 15-20 are highly prestigious races...not so much.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY