|
Quest for the Best | A look back at history
|
| Stromeon |
Posted on 10-03-2013 17:30
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3507
Joined: 06-10-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
Spoiler Not sure if this is quite the right thread but oh well 
Hello everyone,
I've only just become interested in cycling in the past year or so and didn't really know much about the sport before then. I'm the sort of person who likes statistics and things like that and so I've become quite interested in the history of the sport.
So I thought I'd start a project to find out who the best cyclist[s] are and were. I'm pretty sure the No.1 spot is a foregone conclusion but I though it would be interesting to find out how, statistically, the best riders of the current day stack up against riders from the past.
I've devised what I consider to be a simple yet effective ranking system, meaning I don't have to spend hours on this. The formula might change as I go along, incorporating more detailed results.
As I work my way through, I will reveal and update rankings as I go further back in time, and to add some interactivity into it, will invite you to guess who you think will be on top in each 5-year period.
I can start off by revealing the 2012 ranking as according to my simple system:
| 1 |  | Bradley Wiggins | 50 | | 2 |  | Joaquim Rodriguez | 45 | | 3 |  | Tom Boonen | 36 | | 4 |  | Vincenzo Nibali | 22 | | 5 | | Chris Froome | 22 |
Spoiler I am aware that an official, fully in-depth version of this occurs on some ranking websites but I thought this is quite fun + interactivity
Please do tell me what you think: am I talking complete rubbish and wasting my time, or is this genuinely interesting? 
|
| |
|
|
| krisa |
Posted on 10-03-2013 17:32
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3962
Joined: 12-04-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
I think cancellara must also in this list
|
| |
|
|
| Flair |
Posted on 10-03-2013 18:06
|
Domestique
Posts: 402
Joined: 01-08-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
krisa wrote:
I think cancellara must also in this list
Not off last years results. He was injured for most of it. |
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 10-03-2013 18:14
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
"Best" = Most successful
I'll be interested to see if Cav's ever features... Clearly the best sprinter ever (arguable i know) but it depends on your system as to whether simple stage wins make that much of a difference. Same will apply to Cipollini. And also the best prologue rider (again this is arguable) Boardman won't feature.
I can also predict a large proportion of the final table, but it should be interesting to see
|
| |
|
|
| fosforgasXIII |
Posted on 10-03-2013 19:46
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 845
Joined: 28-10-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
Stromeon wrote:
Spoiler Not sure if this is quite the right thread but oh well
This board is for everything that is related to real world cycling, so yes.
But I do not fully understand what you're trying to accomplish. Are you trying to compare the best cyclists from the past to those of today, according to your own point system? |
| |
|
|
| Stromeon |
Posted on 11-03-2013 18:31
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3507
Joined: 06-10-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
TMM: Yes, the rankings are a bit skewed towards the climbers and GC riders but I'm working on trying to correct it a bit (although I have noticed that cyclingranking.com currently list Cav at 530th in their version, just behind Brajkovic and Nocentini  )
fosforgas: Sort of, but mainly just to lay out in simple terms who the best riders were over a certain period and ultimately who the best were ever in a simple way
Without further ado, we move back a few years:
2011
| 1 |  | Cadel Evans | 40 | | 2 | | Philippe Gilbert | 30 | | = | | Michele Scarponi | 30 | | 3 | | Bradley Wiggins | 23 | | 4 | | Juan Jose Cobo | 17 | | 5 | | Mark Cavendish | 15 |
2010
| 1 |  | Fabian Cancellara | 33 | | 2 | | Vincenzo Nibali | 27 | | 3 |  | Andy Schleck | 20 | | 4 | | Philippe Gilbert | 18 | | = | | Joaquim Rodriguez | 18 | | 5 | | Ivan Basso | 17 | | = | | Cadel Evans | 17 |
2009
| 1 | | Alejandro Valverde | 37 | | 2 | | Alberto Contador | 30 | | 3 | | Andy Schleck | 25 | | 4 |  | Denis Menchov | 23 | | 5 | | Mark Cavendish | 15 | | = | | Ivan Basso | 15 |
2008
| 1 | | Alberto Contador | 44 | | 2 | | Carlos Sastre | 30 | | 3 | | Alejandro Valverde | 26 | | 4 | | Damiano Cunego | 21 | | 5 | | Fabian Cancellara | 20 |
So this brings us to the important bit so far - the rankings for the period 2008-2012 (and the overall so far):
2008-2012 & Overall
| 1 | | Alberto Contador | 101 | | 2 | | Cadel Evans | 87 | | 3 | | Bradley Wiggins | 85 | | 4 | | Alejandro Valverde | 81 | | 5 | | Fabian Cancellara | 78 | | 6 | | Joaquim Rodriguez | 73 | | 7 | | Tom Boonen | 64 | | 8 | | Philippe Gilbert | 63 | | 9 | | Vincenzo Nibali | 62 | | 10 | | Andy Schleck | 60 | | 11 | | Denis Menchov | 57 | | 12 | | Michele Scarponi | 56 | | 13 | | Samuel Sanchez | 45 | | 14 | | Mark Cavendish | 40 | | = | | Carlos Sastre | 40 | | 15 | | Ivan Basso | 39 | | 16 | | Frank Schleck | 38 | | 17 | | Chris Froome | 37 | | 18 |  | Levi Leipheimer | 29 | | 19 |  | Thor Hushovd | 28 | | = | | Oscar Freire | 28 | | = |  | Andreas Kloden | 28 | | 20 |  | Roman Kreuziger | 26 |
So, what do you think? And, who do you think will come out top in the next 5 year period, 2003-2007?
|
| |
|
|
| Ian Butler |
Posted on 11-03-2013 18:40
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 21854
Joined: 01-05-2012
PCM$: 400.00
|
Please don't count Armstrong. |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 11-03-2013 19:01
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
I could argue for pages that such rankings have little relevance, at least when you compare eras that are too far from each other. Wondering if Anquetil was stronger than Hinault makes little sense, etc.
Especially comparing pre and post specialisation won't give satisfying results. You might know it or not, but until the early or mid 80's riders rode most races all year long, so it was possible for the strongest rider to win all year long (it's a bit of a caricature of course), whereas in the late 90's - early 2000's, the likes of Ullrich and Armstrong showed a decent level in Suisse or Dauphiné, were very strong during the Tour de France, sometimes rode a couple of classics afterwards and that was it.
As I wouldn't want to look too subjective, I'll give "my" rankings based on cycling quotient rankings (they exist from 1999 onwards), and use the old UCI points system. Maybe it wasn't perfect, but still much better than the current World Tour points system.
That, plus a subjective poll will only result in the sum of subjectivities, but not necessarily any kind of truth, depending on how much people will try to be or manage to be objective.
So, for 2012 :
1. J. Rodriguez
2. B. Wiggins
3. Boonen
4. Valverde
5. Sagan
And 2008-2011 included :
1. A. Contador
2. P. Gilbert
3. C. Evans
4. F. Cancellara
5. J. Rodriguez
And if you want 2003-2007 (both included) :
1. A. Valverde
2. P. Bettini
3. E. Zabel
4. T. Boonen
5. A. Petacchi
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 25-11-2024 09:39
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Ian Butler |
Posted on 11-03-2013 19:52
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 21854
Joined: 01-05-2012
PCM$: 400.00
|
What was the points system before the current one? |
| |
|
|
| fosforgasXIII |
Posted on 11-03-2013 20:40
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 845
Joined: 28-10-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
May we know what your point system is based upon? |
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 11-03-2013 20:44
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
03 to 07 1. Armstrong for certain
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 11-03-2013 20:46
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
It's all there for you to see :
https://www.cqrank.../start.asp
I don't know and couldn't explain the details without checking them out, but basically the old UCI system gave many more points than the WT system does. All races counted for riders, not just WT for WT Pro Teams riders, etc. Sub classifications were also rewarding, and finishing races such as Grand Tours (maybe smallers too) and Monuments or other big classics also awarded points.
Cycling Quotient uses the old UCI system abandoned in 2005 when they introduced the Pro Tour, and applies it to nowadays races.
I copy-pasted all the 100th best riders from 1999-2012 in an Excel file, so I can easily sum whichever years I please and apply a ranking function on the table, and say who were the X bests on that period. |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 11-03-2013 20:47
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
03 to 07 1. Armstrong for certain
Three TDF and... ? |
| |
|
|
| Flair |
Posted on 11-03-2013 20:51
|
Domestique
Posts: 402
Joined: 01-08-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
Nope, pretty sure Armstrong didn't win anything in that range. He won nothing. Results are voided now |
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 11-03-2013 21:25
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
Thats it, but looking at how the previous range works out, that will be easily enough to get the no. 1 spot
Armstrong is the winner of those tours, and always will be. Either void everyone's results or no-ones
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 11-03-2013 21:27
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Even leaving him the benefit of all his points from January 2003 to December 2007 (July 2005 in his case), he only ranks as 20th best on that period. 4576 points when the best (Valverde) scored 8934 points.
Nowhere near #1 then...
From 1999 to this day, just for the record, the five best scorers have been Rebellin, Zabel, Valverde, Bettini, Boonen.
Evans and Contador come next if you only want to consider active riders (discounting Zabel and Bettini).
Edited by Aquarius on 11-03-2013 21:28
|
| |
|
|
| Stromeon |
Posted on 11-03-2013 21:43
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3507
Joined: 06-10-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
Just to clarify, no Armstrong All results that have been voided because of doping etc are discounted here
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 11-03-2013 21:50
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
There's a big problem with just adding the total points over the years. It doesn't tell you who's best, it just tells you who accumulated the most points. In essence, who had the longer career.
It's what www.cyclingrankin... does. The result is a hilarious ranking with Michael Rogers being "better" than Pantani, Cunego ahead of Contador, Hincapie better than Boonen and Cancellara, or Bo Hamburger being better than Lucho Herrera
Or my favorite, Karpets being ranked about several pages ahead of Cavendish
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 11-03-2013 21:56
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
That's true. I'm not too sure how their points system work, but the problem is the same that with any other system.
I'd say additions make sense only if you consider like 4 or 5 years in a row maximum, or the best 5 seasons of a rider for example.
But still, rankings are rather non sense, as I pointed out the other day, probably 30 French guys and like 300 overall could climb better than Bernard Hinault at his peak, so shall we have Hinault up the charts based on achievements or very low in it based on measurable strength ?
**********
Still, considering the best 4 consecutive years from (1998-2001) to (2010-2013), the best 10 scorers then are :
1. Valverde 2006-2009 : 9522 points
2. Contador 2008-2011 : 9257 points
3. Zabel 2001-2004 : 8569 points
4. Gilbert 2008-2011 : 8188 points
5. Rodriguez 2009-2012 : 7983 points
6. Bettini 2003-2006 : 7586 points
7. Boonen 2004-2007 : 7560 points
8. Evans 2007-2010 : 7389 points
9. Armstrong 1999-2002 : 7237 points
10. Rebellin 2001-2004 : 6697 points
I think that reflects quite well which rider dominated cycling in what era (of recent times).
Edited by Aquarius on 11-03-2013 22:16
|
| |
|
|
| Stromeon |
Posted on 16-03-2013 17:34
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3507
Joined: 06-10-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
issoisso wrote:
There's a big problem with just adding the total points over the years. It doesn't tell you who's best, it just tells you who accumulated the most points. In essence, who had the longer career.
It's what www.cyclingrankin... does. The result is a hilarious ranking with Michael Rogers being "better" than Pantani, Cunego ahead of Contador, Hincapie better than Boonen and Cancellara, or Bo Hamburger being better than Lucho Herrera
Or my favorite, Karpets being ranked about several pages ahead of Cavendish
@ Karpets
My system only really takes into points earned by achieving big things in big races, whereas cyclingranking takes into account all points earned in both big races and smaller ones. Thus my system rewards those who stay at the top for a long time, not the ones who are just there for a long time, so all those examples above are indeed reversed for instance
Before I became interested in cycling, my favourite sport was cricket, where thousands of people are constantly analysing statistics about everything, everywhere, at any time etc. Thousands of attempts have been made to find out who the best cricketers are and were and it just seems strange to me that there are so few different rankings/systems trying to determine who the 'best' cyclist is. This is just another ranking system to throw out there, not definitively the best one
I've finished 2003-2007 and it's quite close at the top between two riders...
|
| |
|
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
