Tom Boonen has returned on his former level and has had a fantastic pre-season. He also has reached records in several races he won like: Gent-Wevelgem, E3-Harelbeke, Ronde van Vlaanderen and most importantly: he won Paris-Roubaix 4 times now, as much as Roger de Vlaeminck!!
Roger de Vlaeminck (who has won a lot more races than Boonen (cyclocross, Paris-Nice, Milan-San-Remo etc.) said, directly after the race last sunday, that the solo of Boonen was easy because his opponents were so weak. But in my opinion that arguement makes no sense because it was the 5th fastest Paris-Roubaix in cycling history! So when all those 'weak opponents' were on their way to their hotels, de Vlaeminck would have reached roubaix!
Edited by jona777 on 10-04-2012 22:40
De Vlaeminck is probably a little jealous, and trying to get under the spotlight, as Boonen has equalled his Paris-Roubaix record.
Yet, he's somewhat right : last Sunday, we didn't have a great generation of cobbles riders who were in the form of their life to race against Boonen. That's definitely not Boonen's fault though.
I'm not sure about de Vlaeminck's era either. Cycling was very different back then, but he was already a specialist (of cobbles races), which gave him an advantage over guys who were racing all season long, which many riders did back then. Had he competed during another era, he'd have had a much harder time achieving the same thing (I'm not saying he wouldn't have managed, but that'd have been harder).
Generally-speaking an outrageous domination by one rider, be it over a long period of time, or by a huge gap in one particular race, can show two things : either an outstanding talent, either a lack of talent from the main outsiders.
Aquarius wrote:
De Vlaeminck is probably a little jealous, and trying to get under the spotlight, as Boonen has equalled his Paris-Roubaix record.
This pretty much. He's been criticizing Boonen for years now, knowing that he was going to, eventully, equal/beat his P-R record. Now it's happened and he's gone nuts (just wait for the moment Boonen beats it, if he actually does it ).
Yeah, I think that material is also much better now but the fastest one to reach roubaix was Peter Post, long before de vlaeminck's time and de Vlaeminck spoke about riders of the third rank but ofcourse it would have been another race if Hushovd, Flecha, Pozatto and ofcourse Cancellara were totally fit and wouldn't have fallen. And de Vlaeminck has still reached more than Boonen will ever reach but I am a bit disappointed about his reaction. Others like Museeuw are more honest...
It was easier for de Vlaeminck to use forbidden stuff whitout getting caught than it is for Boonen, funny film though, especially the part in which Boonen praises himself xD the imaginary podiumceremony is funny Edited by jona777 on 11-04-2012 17:20
De Vlaeminck is actually quite right. Tom didn't have any opposition in Roubaix. He had the best team and his concurrents fell. With beating Cancellara and Pozzato in full final, Roger would have said something different.
De Vlaeminck is still a level higher than Boonen and is right about the competition nowadays but he needs to stop being a little bitch that Boonen equalled his record
litllemagnum wrote: De Vlaeminck is still a level higher than Boonen and is right about the competition nowadays but he needs to stop being a little bitch that Boonen equalled his record
I very much doubt a 60+ years old rider is still at a higher level than Boonen.
Joke aside, what do you base yourself on to claim that ?
Both are/were great riders. But cycling is always a bit about being (un)lucky, just as much as being good. If you want to win a race, you kind of need both. Boonen did have competition, but he was just too strong that particular day, and he was "lucky" that Cancellara was out. De Vlaeminck also had a lot of luck in his career, just as well as he had skill. Like when Freddy Maertens rode for him after the misunderstanding about being disqualified (I think it was in RvV)
).
i think they meant a higher level of accomplishment....
