Greatest Riders of All Time



Frigo's Luggage

New Member
Sep 16, 2006
1,249
0
0
I found this graph on the Cycling Hall of Fame Website and thought it was interesting: http://www.cyclinghalloffame.com/riders/alltime25graph.asp

Based on their system, Merckx has more points from just one day races than almost anybody has from grand tours and one day races combined.

The guy that surprises me the most is Coppi. I knew he was great. But, I didn't think he would rate very high on a point system given that most of his career was spent cutting hair in a POW camp.
 
I can guarantee that a lot of Americans will not be able to fathom how Armstrong ranks sixth.

"How can a guy who wins SEVEN Tour de France's come sixth? Is there another race or something??"....:confused: :confused: :confused:
 
Merckx record is simply phenomenal.

Whatever way anyone could choose to analyse it - based on GT performances, GT and stage race performances, stage race and one day performances, GT and one day performances - Eddy's record is way way ahead of everyone else.

The man's a freak!

No only was he head and shoulders above the guys he rode against in his career (Poulidor, Gimondi, Moser, Agostini etc) - his palmares is way ahead of any combination of riders Hinault/kelly, leMond/Hinault, Coppi/leMond............
 
limerickman said:
Merckx record is simply phenomenal.

Whatever way anyone could choose to analyse it - based on GT performances, GT and stage race performances, stage race and one day performances, GT and one day performances - Eddy's record is way way ahead of everyone else.

The man's a freak!

No only was he head and shoulders above the guys he rode against in his career (Poulidor, Gimondi, Moser, Agostini etc) - his palmares is way ahead of any combination of riders Hinault/kelly, leMond/Hinault, Coppi/leMond............
Agreed. Here is a provocative thought that many fans may have pondered over . Could widely suspected doping affect the standings? If so, was one form of doping (hormones and blood enhancement of the 80’s thru 00’) superior over “uppers” of the earlier champions.

My opinion is that the doping practices of different eras certainly affected the standings. I feel that EM and his competition did not take nor needed the recuperative long breaks from EPO and transfusions characteristic of the later times. Eddy competed year round, Armstrong -- only in the Tour. JJ told us why.
 
limerickman said:
Merckx record is simply phenomenal.

Whatever way anyone could choose to analyse it - based on GT performances, GT and stage race performances, stage race and one day performances, GT and one day performances - Eddy's record is way way ahead of everyone else.

The man's a freak!

No only was he head and shoulders above the guys he rode against in his career (Poulidor, Gimondi, Moser, Agostini etc) - his palmares is way ahead of any combination of riders Hinault/kelly, leMond/Hinault, Coppi/leMond............

This is true, although you can't really compare era's, due to lots of different factors. However you can only race whats put in front of you, Merckx record is outstanding.
 
I am relieved that I wasn't listed. It would have been a big embarassment to my modesty. :D

Eddie is the man!
 
ad9898 said:
This is true, although you can't really compare era's, due to lots of different factors. However you can only race whats put in front of you, Merckx record is outstanding.

I know - Indurain pulverised the field.
 
One of the great 'unconventional' riders of all time is Graeme Obree.
Breaking the World Hour record twice and become world champion is amazing when you consider he received no help from a pro team.
 
Crankyfeet said:
I can guarantee that a lot of Americans will not be able to fathom how Armstrong ranks sixth.

"How can a guy who wins SEVEN Tour de France's come sixth? Is there another race or something??"....:confused: :confused: :confused:
From what I remember that ranking isn't very broad, it is based on relatively few races, favors stage races over classics and weights the TdF heavily. IOW, you're not going to find a ranking system that is any more favorable to a TdF specialist like Armstrong.

There is a much better ranking that some Polish guy maintains. It used to get posted every year on Cycling4all.com before that guy pulled the plug. I say better because it was more comprehensive; took into account all the important races of the different eras, gave points for stuff like green jerseys, etc.

Anyway same top result, Merckx was the greatest by far, Hinault was a clear second by a long way, and then you get into folks you could possibly argue over.

FWIW, Armstrong in that ranking system was only in the 20s somewhere. He also broke it down into stage race riders and classics riders. I still don't think Armstrong got even as high as 6th amongst stage race riders. From what I remember, of recent riders Museeuw achieved the highest ranking of anyone (in the classics ranking).
 
Bro Deal said:
It looks like Kelly got robbed.
No surprise, for it's stage races it only includes Grand Tours, no Paris-Nice, Tour of Switzerland, the various important Spanish races over the years.

I want to say that in the cycling4all ranking that Kelly might have been 3rd, but not sure.
 
Wayne666 said:
No surprise, for it's stage races it only includes Grand Tours, no Paris-Nice, Tour of Switzerland, the various important Spanish races over the years.

I want to say that in the cycling4all ranking that Kelly might have been 3rd, but not sure.

You're correct.

Kelly was 3rd on the all time ranking on Cycling4all.
 
tejvan said:
One of the great 'unconventional' riders of all time is Graeme Obree.
Breaking the World Hour record twice and become world champion is amazing when you consider he received no help from a pro team.
+1... He went from a regional star to breaking the hour record to winning a world championship. How crazy is that?
 
Interesting that Ullrich is in there, and Pantani is nowhere to be seen. I guess Ullrich's 2nd places in the TdF add into it. Seems like it would be impossible to come up with an equation that takes all factors into account, but one thing is for sure, any calculation will have Eddy at the top.
 
kennf said:
Interesting that Ullrich is in there, and Pantani is nowhere to be seen. I guess Ullrich's 2nd places in the TdF add into it. Seems like it would be impossible to come up with an equation that takes all factors into account, but one thing is for sure, any calculation will have Eddy at the top.
Look at how the ranking is created. The Tour de France dominates the system, particularly getting on the podium. For me it is a **** way of determining an overall great ranking. Look at how high Ullrich and Zabel are. Sure they had their moments but really are they in the top-20 cyclists of all time, hardly.
 
Wayne666 said:
Look at how the ranking is created. The Tour de France dominates the system, particularly getting on the podium. For me it is a **** way of determining an overall great ranking. Look at how high Ullrich and Zabel are. Sure they had their moments but really are they in the top-20 cyclists of all time, hardly.
Beloki is higher ranked than Cipo.
 
snood said:
Beloki is higher ranked than Cipo.
Because there are no points for stage wins in important races, and other than Roubaix no points for big one day races except for wins (not that Cipo would have earned too many points for classics anyway).
 

Similar threads