Better palmares 8: Valverde vs. Gilbert

m.r.m.

Lightweight humans in a heavyweight bout! I really enjoy these and always learn something new, so let's see how this one shakes out.

RichN95.

My immediate gut instinct is Valverde

blazing_saddles

Gilbert edges the monuments battle on variety and has a rainbow win to boot.
Valverde pips the classics under card and has a GT and several podiums in his locker.
I'd put Valverde slightly ahead on points at this juncture but when you tag on the fact he as 20+ more wins, it should be a no brainer.

joelsim

My vote is for Valverde especially since he’s been winning for 124 years.

RichN95.

Gilbert’s super season in 2011 was when Valverde was on gardening leave

m.r.m.

Oh I hadn't thought about that. I was always thinking back to Gilbert being unbeatable in 2011 and that being a BIG pro in his bracket. It's completely arguable that Valverde might have thrown a spanner in the works in the Ardennes had he been there.

Then again, if Valverde wasn't clean at least until 2011, shouldn't that count in Gilbert's favour?!

RichN95.

Now here’s a controversial opinion. If there was no doping in cycling then Valverde have even better palmares and would now be considered an all time great. Maybe the greatest of the last generation.

m.r.m.

His consistency into biblical age certainly makes it seem that way. He is one of those athletes who isn't just great, but seems to be able to play forever, accumulating an enormous amount of stats like Jerry Rice, Tom Brady or Kareem Abdul Jabbar.

rick_chasey

RichN95 wrote:

Now here’s a controversial opinion. If there was no doping in cycling then Valverde have even better palmares and would now be considered an all time great. Maybe the greatest of the last generation.

I reckon Gilbert would have been winning at a much more precocious age too if that was the case.

andyp

Here's a second controversial opinion - Gilbert has much superior hair.

joelsim

M.R.M. wrote:

His consistency into biblical age certainly makes it seem that way. He is one of those athletes who isn't just great, but seems to be able to play forever, accumulating an enormous amount of stats like Jerry Rice, Tom Brady or Kareem Abdul Jabbar.

Yes, just like those guys who I've never heard of. (Although I think the latter was in Airplane).

joelsim

One thing. Gilbert is 2011 was untouchable. Valverde has been that almost every year. Valverde is also a more flexible rider in that he can pretty much do everything.

RichN95.

andyp wrote:

Here's a second controversial opinion - Gilbert has much superior hair.

But terrible skin

Vino'sGhost

They’re both great riders but different style, it’s an oranges and pears comparison but I think valverde has it.

DeVlaeminck

RichN95 wrote:

Now here’s a controversial opinion. If there was no doping in cycling then Valverde have even better palmares and would now be considered an all time great. Maybe the greatest of the last generation.

Fair question Rich but ultimately isn't it one of those where we will never know.

One thing I do think is Valverde would have won more had he been more aggressive, for me he's lost a lot of races by waiting while someone else took the chance to attack late on. Compared to someone like Boonen who also had a fast finish but was more willing to make the race happen rather than sitting back and hoping for a small group sprint.

Vino'sGhost

DeVlaeminck wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Now here’s a controversial opinion. If there was no doping in cycling then Valverde have even better palmares and would now be considered an all time great. Maybe the greatest of the last generation.

Fair question Rich but ultimately isn't it one of those where we will never know.

One thing I do think is Valverde would have won more had he been more aggressive, for me he's lost a lot of races by waiting while someone else took the chance to attack late on. Compared to someone like Boonen who also had a fast finish but was more willing to make the race happen rather than sitting back and hoping for a small group sprint.

I think that’s a little unfair but I know what you mean

rick_chasey

DeVlaeminck wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Now here’s a controversial opinion. If there was no doping in cycling then Valverde have even better palmares and would now be considered an all time great. Maybe the greatest of the last generation.

Fair question Rich but ultimately isn't it one of those where we will never know.

One thing I do think is Valverde would have won more had he been more aggressive,

Nah.

Pross

My first instinct was Gilbert based on that 2011 dominance but thinking about it a bit more I'd have to go for Valverde. He's probably the closest to a pre-1990s pro who rode all season (and wins throughout). I wish there were more riders of his ilk, Kwia could maybe do it and our friend from the other thread, Moscon but there's not many.

Alex99

They're even on monuments at 4 a piece although Gilbert has three different ones. Gilbert has quite a lot more classics, Valverde quite a lot more stage race results. Then there's grand tours!!

I'd imagine that Valverde would take his palmares, and Gilbert would take his.

Didn't LA say that Valverde was the future of cycling when he came on the scene?

timoid.

I'd probably go Valverde. He hasn't had a down year in his career. Pip disappears some years.

However, I prefer Gilbert as a rider and from a classics purists point of view, he has more variation and more interesting wins.

rick_chasey

When they're done, Gilbert vs Boonen would be interesting.

Gilbert is also the embodiment of the difference between one day and and stage race specialities.

Top class on almost any one day terrain.

Really a nowhere man in stage races; at best a shout for breakaway stages.

ocdupalais

Since 2011, and up until the emergence of Kwiatkowski, Valverde would probably be the one rider people would say is even more Gilbertish than Gilbert. I can’t even be arsed to actually look at their palmares side by side to know without question it’s Valverde by a country mule! The dude was beating Armstrong on a mountain stage at the Tour one year then winning Flèche and L-B-L the next... A GT and 6 World Champ medals (ok, I looked that bit up) on top of all his classic wins/podiums. Gilbert’s great, but as others have mentioned- take away his stellar 2011 and his stature is considerably diminished. His form through the season -and from one season to the next - is more Jack-in-the-box than Valverde. Also, this forum has an unhealthy bias for the flatter northern classics; this needs to be taken into consideration when when agreeing with me.

rick_chasey

Tis true, cobbles leave more of an impression on the fan than the Ardennes riders.

But then there’s an argument that if that is the case, then are they not more prestigious?


I think it’s fair to argue Valverde is great at playing the numbers and has pretty much unrivalled consistency, but how many of his rides have left an impression on us?

Fewer than Gil, for me.






But yes, Valverde is probably the best rider of his generation period.

joelsim

Rick Chasey wrote:

Tis true, cobbles leave more of an impression on the fan than the Ardennes riders.

But then there’s an argument that if that is the case, then are they not more prestigious?


I think it’s fair to argue Valverde is great at playing the numbers and has pretty much unrivalled consistency, but how many of his rides have left an impression on us?

Fewer than Gil, for me.

But yes, Valverde is probably the best rider of his generation period.

Valverde, like it or not, is a legend.

No modern rider can beat this. It’s why he’s Bala.

http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/ri ... ?riderid=5

m.r.m.

The CQ Rankings are weird. Michael Matthews is ranked higher than Kwiatkowski and Elia Viviani is ranked substantially higher than Kittel.

It's also really interesting that there has been a lot of consensus among matchups people previously assumed would be tight battles and others have had way more opinions on either side. I would have thought Boonen vs Cancellara would have been much more divided, but it seems general consensus is with Cancellara. Same goes for Valverde (vs. Gilbert). Nibali Froome, where I assumed it would go to Froome fairly clearly, went much more down the middle.


I think Gilbert is a great rider. Valverde is a top 10 all time rider.

tailwindhome

*vague tangential wondering*

Could you see a light weight rider - say sub 68kg winning Paris Roubaix?

m.r.m.

Possibly Kwiatkowski or Roglic?

Question is would they even seriously target it? If they are below 68 kg and are able to put out the necessary power, they will probably just ride for GC in GT's and have a much easier route to both money as well as a protected role in a team.

pinno

Gilbert. Valverde has never, ever gone on a solo effort even a fraction the length of Gilbert's Flanders win* (and does not habitually suck wheels**).

*One of the best, if not the best Classics I have witnessed.
** Yes, he does it very well and I can't take anything away from playing to one's strengths (and weaknesses).

m.r.m.

I think it's fair to say Valverde values a second or third place more than a rider of his calibre should.

Among climbers he is a great sprinter. So as every sprinter he doesn't need to risk it early. All sprinters get towed to the line and win it at the end. Valverde just does it against climbers on hilly courses that shed regular sprinters instead of the entire peloton on flatter days. You usually don't see Cavendish hit out from 40k or 60k out either (even on pan flat days).

pinno

M.R.M. wrote:

I think it's fair to say Valverde values a second or third place more than a rider of his calibre should.

Among climbers he is a great sprinter. So as every sprinter he doesn't need to risk it early. All sprinters get towed to the line and win it at the end. Valverde just does it against climbers on hilly courses that shed regular sprinters instead of the entire peloton on flatter days. You usually don't see Cavendish hit out from 40k or 60k out either (even on pan flat days).

There's no doubting Valverde's class and difference to Gilbert, which makes the comparison somewhat erroneous but this lot are deep into winter, 3 whole months from M - SR and bored.

joelsim

4 Liege and 5 Flèche. And a whole load of GCs.

And a drugs conviction.

He’s a very wily fella.