Better palmares 7: Uran vs. Gerrans

m.r.m.

Again, palmares is just a catchy title. The discussion is more meaningful if it's slanted towards who is the better cyclist, where each person can define what they consider better and how they weigh wins. Otherwise it just becomes a "counting wins on procyclingstats" exercise.

poptart242

Not a fan by any means but two monuments and his showings at the classics gives it to Gerro for me.

But then he's 7 years older than Rigo, who knows what he could do in the next couple of years? Another tour podium, strong worlds in Innsbruck, Lombardia all possibles for Uran.

m.r.m.

I think in some ways it really comes down to what you think is worth more. A podium at a GT or a monument. That is just rather subjective also because not all monuments are created equal and neither are all GT's.

I think I'd rather have Gerrans career, but Uran could still change that. I doubt it though. Don't think he will win anything meaningful anymore.

timoid.

Uran has three GT second places and if he hadn't, ahem, looked the wrong way at a crucial moment, he'd be Olympic champion. That probably holds more weight than two monuments.

However, I'd rather have Gerrans palmares as I prefer the monuments, so not an objective view.