Who's the Greatest - English Speaking Rider?

tailwindhome

Who in your opinion is the best 'English Speaking' rider?

I'm thinking Kelly's palmares takes this one - any counter arguments?

RichN95.

TailWindHome wrote:

I'm thinking Kelly's palmares takes this one - any counter arguments?

Not from me. LeMond second. Then put Roche, Evans, Simpson and Wiggins and Cavendish in whichever order you fancy.

greasedscotsman

Kelly speaks English? :shock:

tailwindhome

RichN95 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

I'm thinking Kelly's palmares takes this one - any counter arguments?

Not from me. LeMond second. Then put Roche, Evans, Simpson and Wiggins and Cavendish in whichever order you fancy.

Robert Millar above Cavendish but below Wiggins?

RichN95.

TailWindHome wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

I'm thinking Kelly's palmares takes this one - any counter arguments?

Not from me. LeMond second. Then put Roche, Evans, Simpson and Wiggins and Cavendish in whichever order you fancy.

Robert Millar above Cavendish but below Wiggins?

Based on victories, he's below them both for me. Harsh I know - I grew up watching him.

mroli

You can put him below, but it doesn't denigrate the achievement. He did it all himself without the structures that are in place now.

RichN95.

mroli wrote:

You can put him below, but it doesn't denigrate the achievement. He did it all himself without the structures that are in place now.

I'm not criticising him. Far from it - I think he's great. It's just a subjective list.

tailwindhome

RichN95 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

I'm thinking Kelly's palmares takes this one - any counter arguments?

Not from me. LeMond second. Then put Roche, Evans, Simpson and Wiggins and Cavendish in whichever order you fancy.

Robert Millar above Cavendish but below Wiggins?

Based on victories, he's below them both for me. Harsh I know - I grew up watching him.

I'm not convinced Roche shouldn't be above LeMond.

Roche's 87 v 3 Tours.

And Roche is Irish whereas LeMond is clearly a Yankee.

greasedscotsman

Giro, Tour, Worlds vs 3xTours, 2xWorlds? LeMond for me.

rick_chasey

Surprisingly short list really, given how English speakers have infiltrated every corner of the current peloton.

I'd be tempted to say Armstrong, but it's too much hassle.

cal_stewart

LANCE for me even on the gear.

Please lets not start a big he's evil thread, for me 7 back to back has it in a massively corrupt era.

His biggest problem is he's not a very nice bloke

tailwindhome

As the OP I have determined that Lance is eligible for the list but only with his palmares post USADA ban and UCI ratification.

No further discussion will be entered into on this matter.


Andy Hampsten and Phil Anderson are entitled to a place on the list.....they won't get near the top tier though.

LangerDan

According to the combined (ie. stage races and one-day races) on http://www.cyclinghalloffame.com, the most successful "English-speaking" (IMHO, I think that term has the distinct odour of colonialism) riders are

LeMond 8100 points
Kelly 8095
Evans 3965
Roche 3735
Wiggins 2430
McEwen 1800 (forgot wee Robbie, didn't we)
Cavendish 1720
Simpson 1720
Hampsten 1125
Millar,R 1075

bigmat

LangerDan wrote:

According to the combined (ie. stage races and one-day races) on http://www.cyclinghalloffame.com, the most successful "English-speaking" (IMHO, I think that term has the distinct odour of colonialism) riders are

LeMond 8100 points
Kelly 8095
Evans 3965
Roche 3735
Wiggins 2430
McEwen 1800 (forgot wee Robbie, didn't we)
Cavendish 1720
Simpson 1720
Hampsten 1125
Millar,R 1075

That looks about right to me.

RichN95.

I made up my own points system (broadly based on the World Tour* system and counting wins only) and the computer said:

1. Kelly 3506
2. Roche 1062
3. LeMond 1016
4. Cavendish 998
5. Evans 786
6. McEwen 752
7. Wiggins 706
8. Hampsten 588
9. Simpson 532
10. Anderson 436
11. R Millar 422
12. Armstrong 300
13. Hoban 272
14. Farrar 260
15. O'Grady 220
16. Hesjedal 186
17. D Millar 176

This is not my opinion - it's Microsoft Excel's - so blame Bill Gates

(Note: 'Bad Armstrong' would have scored 2400, 'Bad David Millar' 226. 'Bad Hincapie' & 'Bad Leipheimer' didn't score that highly)

*Worlds & Olympics (RR & TT) and GT jerseys scored points

ocdupalais

How about Merckx? He speaks English better than a native: i.e. he's intelligible and almost totally free of grammatical errors...

Anyway, enough of Axel: his Giro stage win and Belgian Champion's jersey will hardly thrust him into top 100, I imagine...and that's giving him the benefit of doubt as being "Good" Axel.
That's "Good" Axel; formerly a pro with Telekom, Motorola, Polti, Phonak, etc,

napoleond

Disappointed no-one has mentioned me

nathancom

Rick Chasey wrote:

Surprisingly short list really, given how English speakers have infiltrated every corner of the current peloton.

I'd be tempted to say Armstrong, but it's too much hassle.

I guess similar to a list of all time Belgium footballers despite you having a hell of a team right now.

I think you have to include Armstrong since without him would cycling be as big in anglophone regions as it is now? He should definitely be demoted several places for is egregious doping though...

Drumlin

Beryl Burton

symo

1. LeMond
2. Burton
3. Wiggins
4. Cav
5. Miller.

tailwindhome

symo wrote:

1. LeMond
2. Burton
3. Wiggins
4. Cav
5. Miller.

WTF

Neither Kelly or Roche make your top 5?

symo

Nope

ju5t1n

RichN95 wrote:

*Worlds & Olympics (RR & TT) and GT jerseys scored points

How did Malcolm Elliot do? ...he won a GT jersey

cal_stewart

burton was over looked by many and I think if you look at it she was the best

tailwindhome

symo wrote:

Nope

By what criteria?

RichN95 wrote:

I made up my own points system

How did Boardman score? Any points for going round in circles?

symo

Hey the question was; who do I believe to be the greatest speaking English rider. Not who do you agree with, met Roche nice bloke and all, but tainted at the end of his career and I just don't warm to Kelly. This is a question about my personal opinion and I gave it. Not saying it is more valid or correct than yours; I just have a different opinion to you.

tailwindhome

symo wrote:

I just have a different opinion to you.

Of course you do. You're entitled to it. I'm just entering into a discussion on it. You don't want to. That's ok.

mididoctors

RichN95 wrote:

I made up my own points system (broadly based on the World Tour* system and counting wins only) and the computer said:

1. Kelly 3506
2. Roche 1062
3. LeMond 1016
4. Cavendish 998
5. Evans 786
6. McEwen 752
7. Wiggins 706
8. Hampsten 588
9. Simpson 532
10. Anderson 436
11. R Millar 422
12. Armstrong 300
13. Hoban 272
14. Farrar 260
15. O'Grady 220
16. Hesjedal 186
17. D Millar 176

This is not my opinion - it's Microsoft Excel's - so blame Bill Gates

(Note: 'Bad Armstrong' would have scored 2400, 'Bad David Millar' 226. 'Bad Hincapie' & 'Bad Leipheimer' didn't score that highly)

*Worlds & Olympics (RR & TT) and GT jerseys scored points

if you strike lance then you have to strike most of that list

so basically its Cav OTOH seeing as bad LA doesn't beat kelly(bad or otherwise) I see the wisdom of this method

mididoctors

TailWindHome wrote:

How did Boardman score? Any points for going round in circles?

his cache is going to rise in hindsight

bipedal

LeMond.

dave_1

Easily Lemond. In the doped category-Armstrong. Even with
13 years tipexed over his palmares runs Hampsten close