Ferminal said:Boonen, would be nice if he started winning prologues though.
He won one in Ster ZLM Toer.
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Ferminal said:Boonen, would be nice if he started winning prologues though.
He's done lots of good long TTs in the past. In 2011 and 2010 he was 3rd in the long ITT in Dauphine, for example. Last year he would have been 5th or 4th in the TDF time trial if not for his bike change.K-0tic said:EBH has the potential but did not prove himself in the classics yet. Also he won't win a very big stage uphill unless he's in the breakaway. Last, I can see him doing a good prologue but a long TT?
mscaviy2601 said:1. Fine by me.
2. Yes. But a rider finishing 30th on both days would get 340 points compared to the 201 points your rider would get. It's not about determining the best rider at any one discipline but the best at all the disciplines.
3. It's a thought experiment. What might happen in the real world doesn't come in to it
ilmaffe said:Gerrans is a good outside pick of this created-for-Wiggo race
Turner29 said:Such a race already exists -- the Tour de France.
Thus, because the winner must be able to climb, time trial, descend reasonably well, occasionally deal with difficult road conditions and sustain a high level of performance for multiple consecutive days, the winner of the Tour de France is the best "all around" cyclist.
sartoris said:Valverde is the only one to come to my mind who's won a big tour, classics, sprints, one week races, high mountain stages, can TT reasonably well when in top form... so the best all-round rider at present in my view.
Nothing for him to do on a sprint against Sagan, Greipel or Cavendish though
Dazed and Confused said:Cavendish. He wins many stages in the Tour.
The Hitch said:pff created for Wiggo. 5th or so in mountains and 3rd in tts is not going to win him something like this. Not even close.
Indeed. Just look at Andy Schleck. Amazing all-rounder. He can do just about everything.Turner29 said:Such a race already exists -- the Tour de France.
Thus, because the winner must be able to climb, time trial, descend reasonably well, occasionally deal with difficult road conditions and sustain a high level of performance for multiple consecutive days, the winner of the Tour de France is the best "all around" cyclist.
mscaviy2601 said:As the OP creator, I can say that it was in no way "contrived" or designed with "one rider in mind". It was meant as the starting point for a discussion. The nature of the "contrived" format was to make all things equal and I chose Wiggins because I genuinely believed he'd have the best chance of top 30ing all the disciplines. I don't claim any certainty in that position and after Sagan's climbing today, I'll happily consider him instead.
Anyway, thankyou for your contribution, I'm sure it was worth the effort.
And pretty bad against the clock!Peccio89 said:Danilo di Luca. At his best he was a great climber, puncheur, and could even sprint well.
kjetilraknerud said:And pretty bad against the clock!
Turner29 said:Such a race already exists -- the Tour de France.
Thus, because the winner must be able to climb, time trial, descend reasonably well, occasionally deal with difficult road conditions and sustain a high level of performance for multiple consecutive days, the winner of the Tour de France is the best "all around" cyclist.
jordan5000 said:So you're saying Andy Schleck is a good TTer and descender?
maltiv said:Indeed. Just look at Andy Schleck. Amazing all-rounder. He can do just about everything.
...except from TTing, sprinting and descending.
orangerider said:Valverde definitely the most complete rider. I'd wager money that Sagan could end up accomplishing as much, if not more, given time - Gilbert is too old to take up a serious grand tour GC classification.