The Greatest Of The Great Cyclists

[Rhythm Thief]

Beryl Burton.

 

[darkstar]

Steve Pete is my choice.
But regarding Armstrong, the post about him not coping with broken forks is ridiculous. If anyone had to take that amout of time out nowadays they would have no chance of winning, cycling has moved on a long way since 1912, you can't compare. I think his win at Leadville was an awesome achievement and confirmed he is a great all round cyclist. People seem to hate on him simply because of his success...

 

[Keith Oates]

It has to be the one and only Eddie Merckx, nobody comes close to him in the number of races he did each year and the wins he made!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Hilldodger]

Fred Wood - probably the greatest rider of the Penny Farthing era.

Major Taylor - The world's first black sports superstar

Bert Harrris - Destined to become a multi world champion until his untimely death at 23

AA Zimmermann? Tessie Reynolds? Charlie Barden?

 

[Hilldodger]

It has to be the one and only Eddie Merckx, nobody comes close to him in the number of races he did each year and the wins he made!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Unless you go back to the golden era of cycling when riders would race on solos, tandems and trikes at the same event and ride tracks, six days, long tours.............

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Steve Pete is my choice.
But regarding Armstrong, the post about him not coping with broken forks is ridiculous. If anyone had to take that amout of time out nowadays they would have no chance of winning, cycling has moved on a long way since 1912, you can't compare. I think his win at Leadville was an awesome achievement and confirmed he is a great all round cyclist. People seem to hate on him simply because of his success...

I don't think anyone has said that they "hate" him, simply that it'd be interesting to see how he coped with some of the things that previous generations of cyclists had to cope with. It seems to be a valid point to me; if you reverse it, how much better would, say, Fausto Coppi have been given the vast support crew and advances in technology which Armstron et al enjoy these days?

 

[darkstar]

I don't think anyone has said that they "hate" him, simply that it'd be interesting to see how he coped with some of the things that previous generations of cyclists had to cope with. It seems to be a valid point to me; if you reverse it, how much better would, say, Fausto Coppi have been given the vast support crew and advances in technology which Armstron et al enjoy these days?

Surely riders adapt to the conditions and equipment available to them?

 

[raindog]

My vote would go to my boyhood hero Jacques Anquetil. Closely followed by the one and only Eddie Merckx.

I was about to say why isn't Anquetil on the list?
I agree with you, but the other way around.
Merckx first followed by Anquetil. LA isn't fit to be in the same room as those two imho.

 

[MacB]

I've only recently become more aware of the larger history of cycling. I started watching the tour just before Indurain became dominant. But, until recently, that was about the extent of my cycling viewing. From a personal perspective I have a soft spot for Indurain and am not so keen on Armstrong. This may change as I watch more old footage and read more books. Though having just completed Armstrongs Every Second Counts I'm in no rush to read It's Not About The Bike.

There is a strong attraction, in a boys own way, to the derring do of the early pioneers. Even if you allow for a bit of exagerration, and a system full of 'banned' substances, some of the achievements are truly astounding. But I do wonder how many of them would have done these things had they grasped some of the long term prices, in terms of physical and mental health.

I reserve the right to arbitrarily change my mind at any point in the future on all of this

 

[Perfect Virgo]

I began following the Tour on TV around the same time and have a lot of admiration for Indurain too. A big favourite of mine who was making his name then was Laurent Jalabert. I thought him a very sporting and dignified rider. I remember him once running away with the Vuelta in the 90s and on one stage he eventually caught a long-standing lone breakaway yet held back to allow the guy to take the stage.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Surely riders adapt to the conditions and equipment available to them?

Well, yes. And on that basis, things are a good deal easier for the present generation of riders than for those of, say, the 1930s. This is partly why these "best ever ..." lists will never be definitive, which is part of the fun.

 

[darkstar]

Well, yes. And on that basis, things are a good deal easier for the present generation of riders than for those of, say, the 1930s. This is partly why these "best ever ..." lists will never be definitive, which is part of the fun.

So the tour is easier nowadays? Looks prettytough to me!

 

[Rhythm Thief]

So the tour is easier nowadays? Looks prettytough to me!

Easier, yes. Easy ... no. At least all the roads are surfaced these days and there's a distance limit: gone are the days of the 5 000 mile tour. And the riders all have support crews and as many bikes as they can eat.

 

[raindog]

So the tour is easier nowadays? Looks prettytough to me!

Shorter stages, better roads, better bikes.

 

[darkstar]

Easier, yes. Easy ... no. At least all the roads are surfaced these days and there's a distance limit: gone are the days of the 5 000 mile tour. And the riders all have support crews and as many bikes as they can eat.

Very true, i never considered the road surfaces, tis a good point. The length makes little difference though imo, these athletes are conditioned to ride for hundreds of miles if needed. It's more about the intensity, which i feel is higher nowadays.