kumazan wrote:
A rider who has won 25 GT stages aged 26 is a great rider, no doubt about that. But to be in the same level of riders who have won 6 GTs plus lots of smaller stage races, 4 monuments + a shitload of pretty big races and 3 monuments including an Ardennes triple, he needs to win something bigger.
I get your criteria, but nowadays you can't expect a sprinter to win a lot of prestigious races, given the fact that sprints are a lot more like lotteries.
There were guys like Cipo and Zabel, but that's a long time ago.
Edited by arthon on 30-05-2011 17:21
SportingNonsense wrote:
When Freire was the age that Cavendish is now, he hadnt won any Milan San Remos. 2 World Championships, sure, but only 1 TDF Stage win, and 2 Vuelta stage wins.
Edit: Beaten to it
For an out of out sprinter, GT stages are the thing to judge, and you really cant fault Cavendish there. What he needs most now though, is a Green jersey.
God I hate those quote pyramids.
That's true. Whenever Cavendish has 3 MSR and 3 WC in his palmares we can repeat this poll. I'd surely vote for Contador again (as I wouldn't have voted for Freire either had he been in this poll), but then I'd find Cavendish inclusion perfectly fair.
A rider who has won 25 GT stages aged 26 is a great rider, no doubt about that. But to be in the same level of riders who have won 6 GTs plus lots of smaller stage races, 4 monuments + a shitload of pretty big races and 3 monuments including an Ardennes triple, he needs to win something bigger.
You can't compare a career until it's over.
When Fignon was 24, he had won the Tour twice. When he retired he had won the Tour.....twice.
When Rominger was 28 he'd won nothing big. By the time he retired he had one of the best palmares of anyone ever.
Or more to the point, when Petacchi was Cavendish's age he had 1 pro win. Now he has somewhere between 180 and 190.
Things aren't linear. Usually when you show up young you fade young. If you show up older, you fade older.
As for the original question, I class Contador, Gilbert and Cavendish's feats as equally impressive when their ages are taken into account. If pressed, I'd go with Contador, as winning every GT you've contested after your first, is incredible.
Edited by issoisso on 30-05-2011 17:27
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
It's not just the results I'm looking at. It's also the way they win their races, making it look very easy.
Cavendish wins mass sprints with ease. He never gets beaten on pure speed. Yes he has a great leadout, which play an important role in his victories. But everyone can see that Cav is by far the fastest guy, when it comes to sprinting.
Btw I didn't vote for Cav but I feel like defending my choice to include Cav.
Gilbert, best at hilly classics and one of the best on cobble stones... The way he rode in the Tour of Belgium last week was impressive, overclassing everyone while it was his first race since his win at LBL.
And i think that if he loses some upper body weight and focuses on GT's that he could get a top 10.
The day Cavendish retires, we'll have a better picture of what he has achieved in his cycling live. Until then, I'll still rate a monument as worth as 15 GT stages. But hey, that's my opinion.
Edit: I put 15 to put a number, you get the idea. Just to avoid nitpicking. Edited by kumazan on 30-05-2011 18:12
I don't know if the Stones were better than the Beatles. Depending from where you stared at them, they probably were. But art is not about ranking, sorting or classifying. They all achieve a lot, period.
Actually I'm more impressed by Gilbert and Cavendish, because, as Fox Mulder used to say : "I want to believe". And I don't believe in Cancellara and Contador.
Bar the tictacs aspect, I'd say Contador's achievements to date are the bigger ones.
