#1 Eddy Merckx at the height of his powers, 1973

I do have a couple of book reviews I'll be getting to shortly - Custom Bicycles:  A Passionate Pursuit by Christine Elliott and David Jablonka, and The Competition Bicycle:  A Photographic History by Jan Heine.  Both are excellent coffee table books and would be great choices as gifts for the upcoming holiday season. Stay tuned...(hopefully, full reviews will be out early in December).

For those of you new to this site, the rest of this article is going to make a lot more sense having first familiarized yourself with the scoring system I've developed to rank the greatest riders from the Modern Era.  Scoring, Part 1 can be found here; Scoring, part 2 can be found here, and if you'd like to read every article in the entire series, you can link here.     

So, let's take a look at the end of the year rankings and point totals:
 
1.   Eddy Merckx  410.5
2.   Bernard Hinault 232.5
#7 Sean Kelly in his final year, 19943.   Fausto Coppi 219.5
4.   Gino Bartali  213.0
5.   Jacques Anquetil  184.0
6.   Rik Van Looy  152.0
7.   Sean Kelly  146.5
8.   Roger De Vlaeminck  139.5
9.   Francesco Moser  131.5
10.  Lance Armstrong  116.5
11.  Felice Gimondi  114.0
12.  Louison Bobet  109.5
13.  Miguel Indurain  98.0
14.  Freddy Maertens  97.5
15.  Ferdi Kubler  96.0
16.  Joop Zoetemelk  91.5
17.  Tony Rominger  89.5
18.  Laurent Jalabert  88.5
19.  Fiorenzo Magni  87.0
20.  Giuseppe Saronni  83.0
21.  Erik Zabel  81.0
22.  Rik Van Steenbergen  73.5
23.  Raymond Poulidor  69.0
24.  Jan Janssen  65.0
25.  Greg LeMond  65.0
26.  Mario Cipollini  63.5
27.  Luis Ocana  59.5
28.  Laurent Fignon  58.5
#32 "The Angel of the Mountains," Charly Gaul29.  Franco Bitossi  56.0
30.  Federico Bahamontes  55.5
31.  Paolo Bettini  55.0
32.  Charly Gaul  53.5
33.  Johan Museeuw  53.0
34.  Jan Ullrich   52.0
35.  Alberto Contador  52.0
36.  Jan Raas 51.0
37.  Lucien Van Impe  50.0
38.  Moreno Argentin  48.5
39.  Stephen Roche  48.5
40.  Hugo Koblet  48.0
41.  Claudio Chiapucci  48.0
42.  Gianni Bugno  47.5
43.  Alberic Schotte  46.5
44.  Alex Zulle 46.0
45.  Michele Bartoli  44.0
46.  Alessandro Petacchi  43.0
47.  Walter Godefroot  42.5
48.  Tom Boonen  42.0
49.  Herman Van Springel  41.5
50.  Charly Mottet  41.0

Active Top 50

#9 Francesco Moser, "The Sheriff" (Paris-Roubaix 1979)What's changed since the last list?  First, Lance Armstrong has now taken sole possession of 10th place, 2.5 points ahead of Felice Gimondi, thanks to his 3rd place in this year's Tour.  Even if he hadn't reached the podium, Astana's victory in the Team Time Trial provided the needed half point necessary to move ahead of Gimondi.

So, what would Lance need to do next year in order to overtake both Francesco Moser and Roger De Vlaeminck, who are just ahead of him in the rankings (#9 and #8), but more important, a whopping 15 and 23 points distant.  Well, nothing short of a Tour victory is going to gain him the needed points.  Here's how it could theoretically work: a win in the Tour would give Lance eight more points, but would also give him a huge 15 point bonus for joining the likes of Jacques Anquetil, Eddie Merckx, and Bernard Hinault, all of whom achieved the rare feat of winning eight or more Grand Tours.  Armstrong would then need another half point to get to the #8 spot, so he would also need a stage win to go along with the Tour victory.  Whew.  That's a whole lot of ifs, ands, and maybes, but hey, it could be done.  I should point out that Armstrong could get that same 15 point bonus for winning either the Giro or Vuelta, but since he will be skipping the Giro for the Tour of California (so he says), and there isn't a chance in hell he's going to do the Vuelta after the Tour, it's pretty safe to say that next year's Tour is going to be the only GT in Lance's near future. 

Of course, the biggest mover on the list continues to be Alberto Contador.  With his Tour victory he has now jumped from #47 to #35.  Should he have another big year in 2010, he'll be the first cyclist since Miguel Indurain to string together three 12+ point seasons.  Alberto is also poised to make the jump into the Top 25 at the ripe old age of 27; this after effectively losing his entire first season due to a life threatening cerebral cavernoma.  It also worth considering that #5 Jacques Anquetil. Year unkown.he was prevented from participating in both the 2006 and 2008 Tour de France due to the doping problems surrounding both his teams at the time (Liberty Seguros and Astana).  What happened in '08 actually helped him - Astana's exclusion from that Tour forced Alberto to participate in, and win, both the Giro and Vuelta, and in the process he gained a 12 point bonus for having won all three Grand Tours.  One thing is certain - if he continues to win at his current pace, and he can avoid injury, he should be able to get close to Jacques Anquetil in point totals.  Alberto is primed to go on a point tear the likes we haven't seen since Bernard Hinault.  Enjoy the ride folks, this is history in the making, and it may be an awful long time before we see another cyclist who possesses both the ability and the will to win any stage race entered - spring, summer, or fall. 

Petacchi's point total remains unchanged.  With his switch from LPR to Lampre, he should be at more marquee events next year, and be better supported.  That said, he'll be 36 in January, well past the prime years of a sprinter.  I could see him gather another couple of points before he retires, but his place as one of the greatest sprint specialists in the sport has already been secured.  It will be interesting to see if Mark Cavendish can continue with his winning ways, and maybe one day join some of the other all-time great fast men in the Top 50.

Lastly, Tom Boonen added one more point to his total with his win at the Belgian National Championships in June, beating out Philippe Gilbert. "Tommeke" has now moved up two spots, jumping over both Charly Mottet and Herman Van Springel to occupy position #48. If he can possibly put his "out of competition" troubles behind him, and get back to his prolific winning ways, then he has a good shot of making the Top 25 before the end of his career.  He just turned 29 in October, has been a professional for 7 years, and has been averaging 6 points per year.  He's on pace for an 84 point career, which would put him up there with some of the best ever.      

On the Bubble

So here's what spots 50-65 look like right now:

#54 Vittorio Adorni. Year unknown.51.  Alejandro Valverde  40.0
52.  Oscar Freire  38.5
53.  Fred De Bruyne  37.0
54.  Vittorio Adorni  36.5
55.  Danilo Di Luca  34.0
56.  Hennie Kuiper  31.5
57.  Alexander Vinokourov 31.5
58.  Marco Pantani  31.0
59.  Rudi Altig  30.0
60.  Gilberto Simoni 30.00
61.  Robbie McEwen 27.0
62.  Richard Virenque  27.0
63.  Fabian Cancellara  26.0
64.  Davide Rebellin  26.0
65.  Damiano Cunego  26.0

Unless Alejandro Valverde's suspension for his DNA ties to the Puerto blood bags is extended outside of Italy, he looks poised to make the jump into the Top 50 list.  The points he picked up by winning this year's Vuelta now have him occupying spot #51, just one point away from overtaking Charly Mottet.  Well, maybe. This is a sticky situation, because if CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sport) rules against "The Green Bullet," the UCI could then move to retroactively extend his ban from racing beyond Italy, and in turn strip him of any victories earned since May 2009 (the date of the original Italian suspension).  Not only could Valverde lose the points from the Vuelta, but also from this year's Dauphine Libere (for a combined total of 7).  Should that happen, Cadel Evans would find himself the recipient of some additional points.  Thank you, UCI.  You've made a fine mess out this one. 

#52 Oscar Freire. Unbelievably, I had forgotten to include Oscar Freire in my original calculations.  He only needs 3 points to make the jump to Top 50, but who knows with Oscar?  He had a rather anonymous season, but he seems to do that sort of thing on a regular basis - long spells without any results, then he comes out of nowhere to capture a major victory.  Injuries have plagued him throughout his career, and had he been healthy for any length of time, I'm sure he would already have made the list.  Anyway, I wouldn't bet against "Oscarito," but sprinters at the age of 34 tend to have fewer and fewer opportunities - just ask Alessandro Petacchi and Robbie McEwen.

Yes, he's back.  Alexander Vinokourov has returned, and he looks to be in pretty decent physical shape, as well.  I wouldn't put it past this guy to land another big victory, or grab some stage wins.  Is he going to make the Top 50?  Not likely. 

In other pleasant developments, Danilo Di Luca is done, along with Davide Rebellin, both with forced early retirements due to their doping violations. Goodbye and good riddance.  I suppose Di Luca could try to return when his suspension is over, but he will be 35 at the time.  Rebellin is 38, so it's safe to say that he is officially through with racing.

As of today, Gilberto Simoni still hasn't signed with a team for next year.  Even if he does, a stage win or two may be about all we'll see from him, and then he'll probably retire after the Giro.

Robbie McEwen is another one of the aging sprinters who had an anonymous, albeit injury plagued, season.  At age 37 Robbie is the oldest among the trio of elder of fast men that includes Freire and Petacchi.  This year was the first since 2005 that the "Pocket Rocket" didn't win Paris-Brussels, breaking his string of four consecutive victories, a record for the prestigious event which saw its first edition held way back in 1893.  At this stage of the game, there's simply not enough time for McEwen to reach Top 50.

#63 Fabian Cancellara. "Sparticus" in action at the '09 Tour of Switzerland.So, along with Valverde and Freire, that leaves Fabian Cancellara and Damiano Cunego as the most likely candidates to move into Top 50 by the end of their careers, as both have decent point totals and are entering their prime years.  Do I think either can make it to the Top 25?  Probably not, since Cance will be 29 next March, has been a professional since 2001, and has scored roughly three points per year on average.  Assuming he rides for another eight seasons, he's on target for a 50 point career.  Now, this could change significantly if he should do something truly remarkable, like win all five of the Monuments and gain a 15 point bonus.  Since "Spartacus" has already won Milan-San Remo, and Paris-Roubaix, I would guess that the next likely Monument victory would come in Flanders.  If he could trim a little weight, and be willing to sacrifice some of his TT power, I bet he could make a run at both Liege-Bastogne-Liege and Lombardia.  Maybe he'll focus on those after he makes his bid for the hour record. 

As for Cunego, he turned 28 in September, has been a professional since 2002, and has also averaged around three points per season.  Like Cancellara, he looks to be on target for a 50 point career, but unlike Fabian, I can't see him in with a shot at all the Monuments, especially Flanders and Roubaix.  Since by his own admission he's no longer a man for the GC in Grand Tours, "The Little Prince" is going to have to win a few more of the Minor Tours (i.e. Tours of the Basque Country, Romandy, or Switzerland) if he's going to have a shot at Top 25.  I just don't see him getting there with stage wins and single day races from here on out.

Valverde, Cancellara, and Cunego all go to illustrate how extremely difficult, and rare, it is to rack up enough points to reach the Top 25.  These are all big champions of today's race scene, and although all of them will more than likely have a few huge seasons ahead of them, it is pretty easy to do the math and realize that it's going to take something very special for even one of these cyclists to reach the Top 25.  

The Best of the Rest

I've had some emails over the past few months asking me about the point totals of some of the other stars of the current peloton.  I don't start actually looking at a cyclist's specific rank until they get close to 30 points, but for what it's worth, here are the point totals for some of today's big names:

Philippe Gilbert. All smiles after capturing the '09 Lombardia.Carlos Sastre  23.5
Denis Menchov  21
Cadel Evans  20.5
Ivan Basso 18.5
Thor Hushovd 16
Mark Cavendish 13
Filippo Pozzato 11.5
Philippe Gilbert 11.5
Andy Schlek 11
Alessandro Ballan 9.5

So, that's the end of season wrap for the Top 25/50 Cyclists of the Modern Era.  Please let me know if there is anyone you think I've overlooked, past or present, as over the last year I've managed to make some pretty big mistakes with both Petacchi and Freire.  Sorry for the confusion, but you can always ask for a refund...

Thanks for tuning in.  

Photo credits:  Eddy Merckx and Sean Kelly, Wiki Commons; Charly Gaul, Memoire du Cyclisme; Francesco Moser, Infostradasports; Jacques Anquetil, Pez/CorVos; Vittorio Adorni, Vittorio Adorni Gran Fondo; Oscar Freire, TopNews.in; Fabian Canellara, CyclingFans/Sirotti; Philippe Gilbert, Telegraph.co.uk

Alberto Contador; "El Pistolero" I'll have to admit that after completing The Top 25 Cyclists of the Modern Era, I needed a bit of a break. The project took nearly a year to complete, and its still a long way from being done. The vast majority of the research is finished, but all the rider biographies have yet to be written. At this point, I'm thinking that since this whole thing has grown into something much larger than I'd originally planned, maybe the project is better served by a large coffee table style of book with loads of statistics, race results, photos, and such. I don't know the first thing about undertaking such an endeavor, so if there is anyone in the book publishing industry (are you listening VeloPress) that could give me some guidance, I'd be all ears.

Alessandro "Ale-Jet" PetacchiSince March of this year, when I published the original Top 50 list, there has been some jostling at the low end of the rankings. Both Tom Boonen and Alberto Contador have added to their point totals - "Tommeke" with his win in Paris-Roubaix and "El Pistolero" with his win in the Vuelta al Pais Vasco (Tour of the Basque Country). Alberto moved up one spot, and now occupies the 47th position, but Tom actually move down one spot to #50.

Since Boonen dropped a spot, that would imply that  there is somebody new to the list who is still active and jumped over him.  Here's what happened: I made a mistake in assigning the original point totals to Alessandro Petacchi, and it was a big one. "Ale-Jet" is one of only seven cyclists to have won 30 or more Grand Tour stages. He joins all the following legends in the accomplishment with his 44 (and counting) Grand Tour stage victories:

• Fausto Coppi with 31 stage wins (this despite WWII interrupting his career for five years)
• Rik Van Looy with 38
• Edddy Merckx with 65
• Freddy Maertens with 35
• Bernard Hinault with 41
• Mario Cipollini with 57

Freddy MaertensBased on my Significant Lifetime Achievement bonus points (as outlined in Scoring- Part 2), Petacchi was shorted 10 points on my previous list. He has also added to his total by winning this year's Grote Scheldeprijs (Grand Prix de l'Escaut), Giro di Toscana (Tour of Tuscany), and two stages of the Giro. Petacchi now stands at number 45, and could conceivably move up quite a few spots before he retires. My apologies to Ale-Jet and his fans.

I should also mention that Alejandro Valverde made some progress with his wins at both the Volta a Catalunya and Dauphine Libere, and he now stands at #53.  They could be the last points Valverde will score for a couple of years, depending on whether or not his suspension in Italy for his Puerto ties is extended elsewhere.  I think it safe to say Gilberto Simoni isn't going crack the Top 50 list before the end of his career; I just don't see where he is going to possibly acquire an additional 11 points, as this year's Giro was probably his last chance to grab big points. Lastly, this year's Tour may be the last best chance for Lance Armstrong to take sole possession of 10th place from Felice Gimondi, which Big Tex will do with even a single stage win (which will include the TTT). That said, even should Lance outright win the Tour, he still won't be able to overhaul Franceso Moser in the #9 spot (for a full explanation of race points see Scoring - Part 1).

Anyway, here is the mid-season Top 50 Cyclists of the Modern Era and their point totals (with places 51-57 added, so you can see who's on the bubble). I'll update the list again at the end of the season.

Alejandro Valverde; "The Green Bullet"1. Eddy Merckx 410.5
2. Bernard Hinault 232.5
3. Fausto Coppi 219.5
4. Gino Bartali 213.0
5. Jacques Anquetil 184.0
6. Rik Van Looy 152.0
7. Sean Kelly 146.5
8. Roger De Vlaeminck 139.5
9. Francesco Moser 131.5
10. Felice Gimondi 114.0
11. Lance Armstrong 114.0
12. Louison Bobet 109.5
13. Miguel Indurain 98.0
14. Freddy Maertens 97.5
15. Ferdi Kubler 96.0
16. Joop Zoetemelk 91.5
17. Tony Rominger 89.5
18. Laurent Jalabert 88.5
19. Fiorenzo Magni 87.0
20. Giuseppe Saronni 83.0
21. Erik Zabel 81.0
22. Rik Van Steenbergen 73.5
23. Raymond Poulidor 69.0
24Gilberto Simoni. Jan Janssen 65.0
25. Greg Lemond 65.0
26. Mario Cipollini 63.5
27. Luis Ocana 59.5
28. Laurent Fignon 58.5
29. Franco Bitossi 56.0
30. Federico Bahamontes 55.5
31. Paolo Bettini 55.0
32. Charly Gaul 53.5
33. Johan Museeuw 53.0
34. Jan Ullrich 52.0
35. Jan Raas 51.0
36. Lucien Van Impe 50.0
37. Moreno Argentin 48.5
38. Stephen Roche 48.5
39. Hugo Koblet 48.0
40. Claudio Chiapucci 48.0
41. Gianni Bugno 47.5
42. Alberic Schotte 46.5
43. Alex Zulle 46.0
44. Michele Bartoli 44.0
45. Alessandro Petacchi 43.0
46. Walter Godefroot 42.5
47. Alberto Contador 42.5
48. Herman Van Springel 41.5
49. Charly Mottet 41.0
50. Tom Boonen 41.0
51. Fred De Bruyne 37.0
52. Vittorio Adorni 36.5
53. Alejandro Valverde 36.0
54. Hennie Kuiper 31.5
55. Marco Pantani 31.0
56. Rudi Altig 30.0
57. Gilberto Simoni 30.0

Photo credits:  Alberto Contador, Flikr gallery of Jesus Ezkerra;  Alessandro Petacchi, Yahoo News; Freddy Maertens, Flikr gallery of Karolus Linus; Alejandro Valverde,  feltet.dk; Gilberto Simoni, Tour-de-france.cz  

Official TVM Top 25 of the Modern Era

1. Fausto Coppi (with Hugo Koblet, Gino Bartali, and Jean Robic)Eddy Merckx, 410.5
2. Bernard Hinault, 232.5
3. Fausto Coppi, 219.5
4. Gino Bartali, 213
5. Jacques Anquetil, 184
6. Rik Van Looy, 152
7. Sean Kelly, 146.5
8. Roger De Vlaeminck, 139.5
9. Francesco Moser, 131.5
10. Felice Gimondi, 114 (higher raw score)
11. Lance Armstrong, 114*
12. Louison Bobet, 109.5
13. Miguel Indurain, 98
14. Freddy Maertens, 97.5
15. Ferdi Kubler, 96
16. Joop Zoetemelk, 91.5
17. Tony Rominger, 89.5
18. Laurent Jalabert, 88.5
19. Fiorenzo Magni, 87
20. Giuseppe Saronni, 83
21. Erik Zabel, 81
22. Rik Van Steenbergen, 73.5
23. Raymond Poulidor, 69
24. Jan Janssen, 65 (higher raw score)
25. Greg Lemond, 65

*still active

Sean KellyIt has been about a month since the initial results were released, and there has been a fair amount of dialogue in the cycling forums, and I’ve received quite a few emails, as well. So, let me address some of the common questions, and misunderstandings, about this list.

First, understand that I am not necessarily saying that Rider X was “better than” Rider Y. It is amazing how rankled some folks got because they felt I had somehow slighted or unjustly ranked their favorite cyclist of all time. What I am saying is that Rider X (i.e. Sean Kelly) scored more points than Rider Y (i.e. Miguel Indurain). These points were issued based on wins in significant races (podium points were awarded for only the World Championship Road Race and all three Grand Tours). The operative word here is WINS, otherwise known as VICTORIES. This was not a popularity contest. I can’t tell you how many times someone vented about (fill in the blank), but didn’t bother to first understand how the points were earned. I went through great pains to outline exactly the way all of this was done, so please take the time to read Scoring Parts 1 and 2, before you send a nasty email asking me how I could have possibly overlooked Jan Ullrich, Richard Virenque, or Marco Pantani (the most often mentioned “jilted” cyclists).

Anyway, here are the cyclists (with their point totals) who didn’t make the Top 25, but did finish in the Top 50:

26.Mario "The Lion King" Cipollini Mario Cipollini, 63.5

27. Luis Ocana, 59.5

28. Laurent Fignon, 58.5

29. Franco Bitossi, 56

30. Federico Bahamontes, 55.5

31. Paolo Bettini, 55

32. Charly Gaul, 53.5

33. Johan Museeuw, 53

34. Jan Ullrich, 52

35. Jan Raas, 51

36. Lucien Van Impe, 50

37. Moreno Argentin, 48.5

38. Stephen Roche, 48.5

39. Hugo Koblet, 48

40. Claudio Chiapucci, 48

41. Gianni Bugno, 47.5

42. Alberic Schotte, 46.5

43. Alex Zulle, 46

44. Michele Bartoli, 44

45. Walter Godefroot, 42.5

46. Herman Van Springel, 41.5

47. Charly Mottet, 41

48. Alberto Contador, 39.5*

49. Tom Boonen, 37*

50. Alfred De Bruyne, 37

Just finishing outside of the Top 50 were Vittorio Adorni (36.5), Hennie Kuiper (31.5), Marco Pantani (31), Alejandro Valverde*, Rudi Altig, and Gilberto Simoni* (all with 30 points).

*Still active.

Greg LemondNext, I don’t need to be reminded that anyone was a doper, or alleged doper. No, I don’t condone the use of drugs in this sport, but I am not going to revise history and strike from the record books anyone who admitted to doping, was rumored to have doped, or failed a drug test (in which case the results from a positive in any particular event have already been revised). Yes, drugs are, were, and will probably forever be a black stain on pro cycling, but I refuse to let the issue dominate every single discussion or conversation when reviewing its history. Really, who among this Top 50 list was “clean” throughout their career? I’ll nominate Gino Bartali and Greg Lemond. As for the rest…

Moving along, some have objected to the way I have handled the scoring system. Fair enough. I’m the first to agree that this is not perfect. I had almost awarded points for each day a cyclist was in the leader’s jersey during each of the three Grand Tours. In the end, I felt it skewed the results too far in favor of the GT champions to the detriment of the legendary single-day warriors, such as Rik Van Looy and Roger De Vlaeminck; this was probably my biggest disagreement with some of the other ranking systems. I think awarding just a half point for stage wins was a compromise that rewarded all the GT players – those competing for general classification, sprinters, mountain climbers, and those hunting for classification jerseys.

Luis Ocana leading Eddy Merckx, 1971 Tour de FranceI also struggled over other pieces of the scoring puzzle, such as the awarding of points for Significant Lifetime Milestones, and particularly, the Missing Years Adjustment Formula (again, see Scoring, Part 2). I’ll have to admit that some of my favorite cyclists (Fiorenzo Magni, Greg Lemond, Luis Ocana, Federico Bahamontes, Charly Gaul, and Lucien Van Impe) did not rank out as high as I’d hoped. Of course, that only goes to illustrate I really did let chips fall where they may, and did not try to let personal biases enter into the equation. After spending nearly a year working out all the kinks, I hope the final Top 50 list will at least serve to bring some attention to some of the lesser  known stars of the sport, or to those who are sometimes overlooked when discussing “the best ever.”

Also, as promised, I am publishing a Top 25 list that does not include any of the special adjustments. So, for the purists who may think I’m taking too many liberties with my “revisionist history,” here are the results sans adjustments (the scores included are the raw scores achieved through just the first part of the scoring system, which only included the results from the races in Scoring, Part 1):  

Gino "The Pious" Bartali

1. Eddie Merckx, 290.5
2. Bernard Hinault, 165.5
3. Jacques Anquetil, 157
4. Fausto Coppi, 144.5
5. Gino Bartali, 144.5
6. Sean Kelly, 126.5
7. Francesco Moser, 111.5
8. Rik Van Looy, 107
9. Roger De Vlaeminck, 100.5
10. Miguel Indurain, 98
11. Felice Gimondi, 92
12. Lance Armstrong, 91
13. Freddy Maertens, 87.5
14. Louison Bobet, 87.5
15. Tony Rominger, 85.5
16. Giuseppe Saronni, 83
17. Joop Zoetemelk, 81.5
18. Laurent Jalabert, 78.5
19. Raymond Poulidor, 69
20. Ferdi Kubler, 68
21. Fiorenzo Magni, 63
22. Rik Van Steenbergen, 62.5
23. Erik Zabel, 61
24. Luis Ocana, 59.5
25. Laurent Fignon, 58.5

Miguel IndurainTiebreakers were settled by the rider with the greater number of overall career victories. You’ll notice that the list is quite similar to the “official” rankings (with all the included adjustments); it’s just that the order was shuffled around a bit. The most significant difference is that both Jan Janssen and Greg Lemond are missing, replaced by Ocana and Fignon. It is also worth noting that all the Top 25 cyclists who received a Missing Years Adjustment, with the exception of Greg Lemond, remained on the list. So there you have it, make of it what you will. As far as I’m concerned, both Lemond and Janssen deserve to make the cut, Coppi and Bartali should be ahead of Anquetil, both Gimondi and Bobet belong in front of Indurain, and Kubler should be above Rominger, Jalabert, and Zoetemelk. These are all reasons that the Official TVM Top 25 list will be used in all future articles referencing a cyclist’s rank. So, upon further review, I guess I am saying that certain champions were better than others. After all, isn’t that the purpose of these ultimately futile exercises?

As always, thanks for reading.

All artwork compliments of Dave Brinton. The illustrations of Fausto Coppi, Sean Kelly, Greg Lemond, Luis Ocana, Gino Bartali, and Miguel Indurain are available as prints, signed and numbered in limited editions of 100. Image size is approximately 10” x 10”, printed with archival inks on 100% rag paper. Price is $65 each, plus shipping. To order prints email the artist at brintoni@gmail.com.  You can also visit his website, where you can view the complete collection -www.brintoni.com. 

1. Eddy Merckx, Begium (1966-1978)

"The Cannibal"

Total points: 410.50

2. Bernard Hinault, France (1975-1986)

"The Badger"

Total points: 232.50

3. Fausto Coppi, Italy (1939-1959)

"Il Campionissimo"

Total points: 219.5

4. Gino Bartali, Italy (1935-1954)

"Il Pio";"Il Vecchio" - The Pious; The man of Iron

Total points: 213

5. Jacques Anquetil, France (1954-1969)

"Maître Jacques"; "Monsieur Chrono" - Gentleman Jacques; Mr. Chrono

Total points: 184

6. Rik Van Looy, Belgium (1953-1969)

"The Emperor of Herentals";"Rik II"

Total points: 152

7. Sean Kelly, Ireland (1977-1994)

"King Kelly"

Total points: 146.5

8. Roger De Vlaeminck, Belgium (1969-1984)

"The Gypsy";"Mr. Paris-Roubaix"

Total points: 139.5

9. Francesco Moser, Italy (1973-1988)

"Cecco"

Total points: 131.5

10. Lance Armstrong, United States (1992-2005;2009-?)

"The Boss"

Total points: 116.5

11. Felice Gimondi, Italy (1965-1979)

"The Phoenix"

Total points:114 

12. Louison Bobet, France (1947-1961)

"The Baker of St Méen"

Total points: 109.5

13. Miguel Indurain, Spain (1984-1996)

"Big Mig"

Total points: 98

14. Freddy Maertens, Belgium (1972-1985)

"The Ogre"

Total points: 97.5

15. Ferdi Kubler, Switzerland (1940-1957)

"The Cowboy"

Total points: 96

16. Joop Zoetemelk, The Netherlands (1970-1987)

"The Wheelsucker"

Total points: 91.5 

17. Tony Rominger, Switzerland (1986-1997)

"El Martillo" - The Hammer

Total points: 89.5 

18. Laurent Jalabert, France (1989-2002)

"Jaja"

Total points: 88.5

19. Fiorenzo Magni, Italy (1941-1956)

"The Colossus of Monza"

Total points: 87

20.Giuseppe Saronni, Italy (1977-1989)

"Beppe"

Total points: 83

21. Erik Zabel, Germany (1992-2008)

"Ete"

Total points: 81

22. Rik Van Steenbergen, Belgium (1943-1966)

"Rik I"

Total points: 73.5

23. Raymond Poulidor, France (1960-1977)

"Pou-pou";"The Eternal Second"

Total points: 69

24. Jan Janssen, Netherlands (1962-1972)

"The Professor"

Total points: 65 (tied with Lemond, but greater raw score)

25. Greg LeMond, United States (1981-1994)

"Le Monster"

Total points: 65

This article will complete the scoring system that has been developed to rank Top 25 Cyclists of the Modern Era. I outlined all the races that were part of the basic system in Scoring, Part 1; the assigned, or earned points, through that framework are what I will refer to as the “raw scores.”

As a refresher, points were earned by victories in the following ten categories:

The Monuments

The World Championship Road Race*

Classics/Olympics/Time Trial Championships

Semi-Classics/National Championships

Minor Tours

Grand Tours*

Grand Tour Classification Competitions (Mountains and Points)

Grand Tour Stages

Season Long Competitions

Bonus: The UCI World Hour Record 

*Points also awarded for podium spots.

After I had completed the basic scoring sheets** for all the top cyclists of the Modern Era, it was a lot easier to compare all the greats; I now had a nice snapshot of an entire career, as all their major victories had been grouped into these neat little categories (along with the points earned in each). Virtually every other historical source I’d consulted provided career wins (palmares) in a year-by-year format. When I began evaluating victories grouped by type of race, this new perspective started to reveal some rather significant lifetime achievements, which had been somewhat hidden by the standard yearly results format. Some of these career milestones are quite well known, and often discussed, while others may come as a complete surprise to even the most diehard of fans.

**(I’ll be publishing all the riders scoring sheets, which will include a biography, my commentary, points earned in each race and category, and all adjustments as outlined below. Unfortunately, I won’t be able to release these all at once.)

It was these hidden major accomplishments that convinced me there was far more to a cyclist’s career than simply the sum total of their victories. This may be stating the obvious when it comes to legends like Fausto Coppi, Eddy Merckx, or Bernard Hinault, but I was really surprised by some of the significant achievements of the less well-known champions of the Modern Era, such as Jan Janssen (photo, left). In the final analysis, I felt that these special lifetime accomplishments actually warranted additional points, in addition to the raw scores achieved through victories in the most significant races. I know you’re not all going to agree with this approach, but I believe this solution provides a more accurate representation of a cyclist’s true standing in the pecking order of all-time greats.

I created three separate categories of Significant Lifetime Milestone Adjustments. So that no particular type of cyclist was given a leg up over another, there is one category for single day races, one for Grand Tours, and finally a combined category. Further, each category includes three Milestones. The general rule of thumb was that if there were more than seven cyclists who had achieved a particular Milestone up for consideration, I decided it was no longer unique, thus no longer “significant,” and it was eliminated from inclusion. Conversely, I didn’t want to choose Milestones that were so inclusive that only one or two cyclists made the cut (there were any number of special achievements that could have been created just for Eddy Merckx). The points awarded for each “bonus” were based on the number of cyclists who qualified for each Milestone. I spent months pouring over statistics and race results before finally choosing the nine listed below; this part of the scoring system was without a doubt the most difficult piece of this project.

I’ve also opted to award some extra points for record holders of the 12 most important races (after all, these are lifetime achievements, as well); these include the five Monuments, the World Championship Road Race, and all three Grand Tours. The extra points given were the same as those awarded for a single victory in each respective race (see Part 1).

Finally, I’ve decided to create a Missing Years Adjustment Formula, which is my way of compensating those cyclists who lost at least two years of their careers due to war, an injury, or an illness. The logic behind this decision has already been examined in great detail through an earlier series of articles titled The Missing Years – War, Injury and Illness, Parts 1-3. In the end, all cyclists that received an adjustment would still have made The Top 25 list (with one exception, which will be revealed when I publish the final rankings). The math behind the additional points that were awarded can be found below.  

Photo credits: Eddy Merckx, Pez/Cor Vos; Jan Janssen, Tour De France.nl; Felice Gimondi, La Lanterna del Popolo; Rik Van Steen Bergen, La Lanterna.

So, on with the final phase of scoring...

Significant Lifetime Milestone Adjustments, 10 - 15 points

1.  Single-day races

a)  Won all five Monuments, 15 points

          Rik Van Looy, Eddy Merckx, Roger De Vlaeminck

b)  25 combined wins in all major single-day race categories (Monuments, WC, Classics, and Semi-Classics), 10  points

          Gino Bartali, Fausto Coppi, Van Looy, Merckx, De Vlaeminck, Francesco Moser

c)  Won 30 Grand Tour Stages, 10 points

          Coppi, Van Looy, Merckx, Freddy Maertens, Bernard Hinault, Mario Cipollini, Alessandro Petacchi

2.  Grand Tours (Giro d’Italia, Tour de France, Vuelta a Espagna)

a)  Won 8 GTs, 15 points

          Jacques Anquetil, Merckx, Hinault

b)  Won all three GTs, 12 points

          Anquetil, Felice Gimondi, Merckx, Hinault, Alberto Contador

c)  Won 8 Classification Jerseys (Points or Mountain, any combination), 10 points

          Bartali, Federico Bahamontes, Merckx, Lucien Van Impe, Sean Kelly, Laurent Jalabert, Erik Zabel

3.  Combined Category (single-day races + Grand Tours)

a)  Achieved at least one victory in every major road category (Monuments, WC RR, Classics, Semi-Classics, Minor Tours, Grand Tours, GT Classification Competitions, GT Stages, and Season Long Competitions), 12 points

          Louison Bobet, Ferdi Kubler, Jan Janssen, Merckx, Hinault

b)  Won 3 of any 5 Monuments and any GT, 10 points

          Coppi, Bobet, Merckx, Gimondi, Hinault, Moser, Kelly

c)  200 or more career road victories, 10 points

          Van Looy, Merckx, De Vlaeminck, Joop Zoetemelk, Hinault, Zabel 

Significant Race Records, various points

1.  Milan San-Remo, Merckx (7x), 3 points

2.  Ronde van Vlaanderen (Tour of Flanders), Achiel Buysse*, Fiorenzo Magni, Eric Leman, and Johan Museeuw (3x), 3 points

3.  Paris-Roubaix, De Vlaeminck (4x), 4 points

4.  Liege-Bastogne-Liege, Merckx (5x), 3 points

5.  World Road Race Championship, Alfredo Binda*, Rik Van Steenbergen, Merckx, and Oscar Freire (3x), 4 points

6.  Giro di Lombardia (Tour of Lombardy)(5x), Coppi, 3 points

7.  Giro d’Italia (Tour of Italy), shared by Binda*, Coppi, and Merckx (5x), 6 points

8.  Tour de France, Lance Armstrong (7x), 8 points

9.  Vuelta a Espagna (Tour of Spain), shared by Tony Rominger and Roberto Heras (3x), 4 points

*These cyclists are part of the Heroic Era (pre 1938), and are not included as part of The Top 25 Cyclists of the Modern Era 

“Missing Years” Adjustment, various points

1.  Gino Bartali, 49 points

2.  Fausto Coppi, 36 points

3.  Ferdi Kubler, 16 points

4.  Fiorenzo Magni, 21 points

5.  Rik Van Steenbergen, 7 points

6.  Greg Lemond, 13 points

7.  Lance Armstrong, 15 points

Missing Years Formula

Do not continue reading this section unless you are an analytic, numbers crunching geek. There, you’ve been warned, so for those who would like to know just how I arrived at the above added points, read on. First off, my objective with this adjustment was to answer a huge “what if…”  What if all the above cyclists had been healthy and racing during their years lost to war, injury, or illness? Just how many additional points would they have scored, extrapolated from their points earned during their productive years. Productive years – that is the key to this equation. Many cyclists hung on well past their ability to win races. The best example is Rik Van Steenbergen. He turned pro in 1943, won his last race (of those available in this scoring system) in 1958, yet he did not retire until 1966. In other words, for eight of Steenbergen’s 24 years as a pro, he didn’t win a marquee event. I don’t think it would make a lot of sense to include those final eight years if we are trying to determine what he might have won during his productive “missing years” lost to WWII from 1943 to 1945. So, when I’m calculating average points scored during a career, “career” is defined as follows: the year turned professional through the last year points were earned in a qualifying race. So here is the formula:

1.  Length of career (defined above)

2.  Subtract from #1 the number of “missing years”

3.  Average number points scored in a cyclist’s scoring career (rider’s raw score divided by the total from step 2)

4.  Number from step 3 multiplied by the number of missing years (this will equal the number of points a cyclist could have score during his missing years)

5.  Subtract from number 4 any points actually scored during the missing years (i.e. Van Steenbergen won the Belgian Nats in ’43, and Flanders in ’44; it was one of the rare big-time races that took place during the war years)

6.  If the missing years took place during the cyclist first five years as a professional, then they received 75% of the figure from step 5. If the missed years took place during a cyclist’s prime, five years after turning professional, then they received 100% of the total from step 5.

7.  Finally, the number from step 6 is rounded to the nearest whole number.

Yes, I know this is a bit like filling out an income tax return, but here is an example:

             Rik Van Steenbergen (professional from 1943-1966)

1. Scoring Career, 1943-1958, 16 years (last point scored was in ’58 Criterium de As)

Missing Years, 3 years (1943-1945)

2. Actual number of scoring years, 13 (16-3)

Raw Score, 62.5 points (all points earned over entire scoring career)

3. Average number of points scored during scoring career, 4.8 (62.5/13)

4. Hypothetical points scored during Missing Years, 14.4 (4.80 x 3)

Actual points scored during Missing Years, 5 (Belgium National Champ, ’43,’45 and Flanders, ’44)

5. Adjustment for points scored during Missing Years, 9.4 points (14.4 - 5)

6. Adjustment, as missed years were during cyclist’s first five years, 7.05 points (.75 x 9.4)

7. Rounded to nearest whole number, 7 points

There, see how easy that was? I’ll release each cyclist’s adjustment formula when I publish each biography, so until then you’ll just have to take my word for each of the final numbers I’ve used in the formula.

Up next, the unveiling of The Virtual Musette’s Top 25 Cyclists of Modern Era.  

The time has finally arrived to reveal the scoring system I’ve developed to rank The Top 25 Cyclists of the Modern Era (1938 - present).   This is a long post, so you'd better go grab an espresso, glass of wine, or a frothy mug o' brew, because this one is going to take a while. First off, this project would have never been possible without the amazing work and efforts of other cycling historians, and their websites (these can also be found in my Links section, under the sub-heading of History). Thank you to all the following:

Tom James, both VeloArchive and Professional Cycling Palmares

Bill and Carol McGann, Bike Race Info

Sam Barrows, Cycling Hall of Fame

Barry Boyce and Graham Jones, Cycling Revealed

Andy Roose, Jasper Van Hoof, and the rest of the gang at Cycling Quotient

The team at Velopalmares (French)

The team at Memoire du cyclisme (French)

The Virtual Musette’s ranking system involves two major components, the first of which I’ll cover in this post - the actual races used in the scoring, and the points applied to these events. In the second installment I’ll cover the special adjustments to the basic scores, which will include Significant Lifetime Achievements and the Missing Years Adjustment Formula (to which I’ve alluded in a previous series of background articles).

I think you’ll find that the point values are somewhat in line with those assigned under the old FICP-ranking (now Cycling Quotient). The major difference is that I have only awarded points for outright victories (with two major exceptions - all the Grand Tours and the World Championship Road Race). Overall, I think this approach not only emphasizes all the important career highlights of the legends of the sport, but also serves as a fairly simple and straightforward method by which to rank riders. Complicated algorithms and intricate detailed point systems only serve to confuse the issue, which is to answer the question: who were the best-of-the best, and who came out victorious more frequently in the races that mattered most?

My goal was to create a somewhat balanced approach that recognized major accomplishments across a broad range of categories: single-day races, time trial events, stage races, the Grand Tours, season-long competitions, and the UCI Hour Record. Most other ranking systems I’ve encountered placed too much of an emphasis on either the Grand Tours, or conversely on results in the single-day races. The general idea here was to create a greater awareness of, and appreciation for, those cyclists who have left their mark in a variety of different road events. Specialists, such as the pure sprinters or mountain goats, did not typically fair well in the final results.

Of course, one of the major difficulties encountered when trying to compare and contrast careers from different eras is that races have had varying degrees of importance on the cycling calendar through the years. Some races are now defunct, while others have only recently gained importance or prestige. I’ve tried to mitigate this situation by including not only a broad range of both single-day races and stage races from all the historically significant cycling regions, but by also choosing events that have/had been around for approximately 40 years (next to each race is its inception date). In the final analysis, I was satisfied that the scoring was fairly balanced across all Modern Era time periods (i.e. the addition of the more recent Clasica de San Sebastian offsets the inclusion Bordeaux-Paris, which is now defunct).

Perhaps the most contentious part of this system is that I have chosen to award bonus points for various Significant Lifetime Achievements, race records, and a Missing Years Adjustment Formula (applied to compensate those cyclists who lost at least two years of their careers due to war, injury or illness). For the purists, I’ll release the results of the points scored both with, and without, these special adjustments. That said, The Virtual Musette’s “official” list of the Top 25 Cyclists of the Modern Era, and all future references to a rider’s ranking are going to reflect all components of the scoring system.

Finally, if you want to see the list of victors for any particular event, go to either VeloArchive or BikeRaceInfo. Eventually, all this data will be available here, but it’s a project for another day.

Caricature credits: Eddy Merckx, Johan Museuuw, Jacques Anquetil, and Lance Armstrong, all compliments of Magixl.com

Okay, so here we go. The following are all the included events and their assigned points:

1.  The Monuments 

These are the monsters of the single-day races. They have held tremendous importance, and prestige for their victors, throughout the Modern Era and before. With only a handful of exceptions, the great champions usually found a way to win at least one of these storied events.  I've opted to give a higher value to Paris-Roubaix, after all it is the Queen of the Classics.  There was a time when the best in the peloton viewed their careers incomplete without a victory in this race.  Hinault despised the cobbles and mud, yet knew his place in the hierarchy of legends would have been diminished had he not been the first across the Roubaix velodrome finish line at least once in his career (which he did in 1981, his first and last appearance).  The case can certainly be made that PR may not be the most difficult of the Monuments (I believe that honor would go to Flanders, the only one of this group without a four-time winner), but it is without a doubt the most prestigious of the Classics.

     Milan San-Remo (1907), 3 points

     Tour of Flanders (Ronde van Vlaanderen) (1913), 3 points

     Paris-Roubaix (1896), 4 points

     Liege-Bastogne-Liege (1892), 3 points

     Tour of Lombardy (Giro di Lombardia) (1905), 3 points 

2.  World Championship Road Race (1927) 

      1^st, 4 points; 2^nd, 2 points; 3^rd, 1 point 

Not only have I opted to give the WC RR four points, but have also chosen to recognize podium places. I think in recent years this race has lost some of its luster, but the extensive list of legendary gold medallists is certainly evidence of the importance of this event. The fact that the race takes place on a different course each year, and is contested by national, rather than trade teams, certainly lends to its distinct character. These are also differences that make this a difficult race to capture. Like Flanders, no one has won the event more than three times, but more significantly, only a handful of cyclists have ever made the podium four times, and no one has won three times in a row (one of the few things Merckx was not able to accomplish). Further, two of the greatest Monument champions of all time, Sean Kelly and Roger De Vlaeminck, were winless in the event, a testament to the special difficulties encountered when seeking success in this unique once-a-year battle of the national teams.

3.  Classics/Olympics/TT Championships, 2 points 

One can argue that the Olympic RR is just as difficult to win as the WC RR, but the race has only been open to professionals since 1996, so I’m including it with the other two- point races. Paris-Brussels was once a very prestigious Spring Classic, but after 1966 it lost its shine (thanks to Amstel Gold), and was moved from spring to late summer, so only the earlier editions warrant inclusion in this category.

     Olympic Road Race Gold (1996)

     Fleche Wallone (1936)

     Ghent-Wevelgem (1934)

     Amstel Gold (1966)

     Championship of Zurich (Zuri-Metzgete) (now closed for pros, 1917-2006)

     Paris-Brussels (1893)(Only Pre 1967 events included in this category)

     Clasica San Sebastian (1981)

     Bordeaux-Paris (defunct, 1891-1988)

     Paris-Tours (1896)

     Grand Prix de Nations (defunct TT Championship, 1932-2004)

     World TT Championships (1994)

     Olympic TT Gold (1996)

4.  Semi-Classics/Nationals, 1 point  

This was a tough category, as I had a difficult time trying to figure out which races to include, or exclude. Again, the general rule of thumb was to include an event that had been in existence for at least 40 years; these are the true semi-classics, and although they do tend to have somewhat regional biases (i.e. Italians tend to win in Italy and the Belgians in Belgium), they are all fairly prestigious races. There really is a dearth of well established Spanish one-day races that have been around for a long time, but this is somewhat offset by the higher point totals assigned to Spain’s week long stage races. Also, the Criterium International was known as the Criterium National prior to 1978, and only open to French riders. Once it became an international event, I moved it into the stage race category, and assigned it two points. Lastly, although relatively unknown now, both the Criterium des As and the Trofeo Angelo Baracchi were prominent year-end events, and since both were by invitation only, just the top cyclists of the season were present; thus the list of victors is quite illustrious.  

     National Championships (various inception dates)

     Het Volk (1945)

     Kuurne-Brussels-Kuurne (1946)

     Dwars door Vlaanderen (1945)

     Brabantse Pijl (1960)

     GP de l’Escaut (Grote Scheldeprijs, Scheldeprijs Vlaanderen) (1907)

     GP E3 (E3 Prijs Vlaanderen) (1958)

     GP Ouest France (Grand Prix de Plouay) (1931)

     Grand Prix Fourmies (1928)

     Paris-Brussels (1893, only post 1966 included in this category)

     Criterium National (1932-1979)

     Criterium des As (defunct invitational derny based event, 1921-1990)

     Trofeo Angelo Baracchi (defunct invitational two man TTT, 1946-1990)

     Milan-Turin (1876)

     Giro del Lazio (1933)

     Giro dell’Emilia (1909)

     Giro del Piemonte (1906)

     Giro della Toscana (1923)

     Giro della Romagna (1910)

     Coppa Placci (1923)

     Tre Valle Varesine (1919)

     Giro del Veneto (1909)

     Frankfurt GP (Rund um Heninger-Turn) (1962)

     GP Gippengen (1964)

5. Minor Tours and stage races, 2 or 3 points 

Three points were given to the more prestigious weeklong stage races. It may seem odd that the Volta (not to be confused with the Vuelta) was included in this grouping, but it’s list of winners, and extensive history, convinced me to include it with the other well-known races. It’s actually the third oldest stage race behind the Tour and the Giro, making its first appearance in 1911.

     3 point races:

     Paris-Nice (1933)

     Tour of Switzerland (Tour de Suisse)(1933)

     Tour of Romandy (1947)

     Dauphine Libere (1947)

     Tour of Catalonia (Volta a Catalunya) (1911)

     Tirreno-Adriatico (1966)

     Tour of the Basque Country (Vuelta al Pais Vasco)(1924)*

     *(’31-‘34 & ’36-‘51, no race)

     2 point races:

     Criterium International (1978- present)

     Settimana Internazionale Coppi e Bartali (Formerly Giro di Sardegna) (1958)

     Four Days of Dunkirk (1955)

     Tour of Luxembourg (1935)

     Ronde van Nederland/Tour of Holland/Eneco Tour (1948)

     Tour of Belgium (1908)

     Catalan Week (Setmana Catalunya) (defunct,1963-2005)

     GP Midi Libre (defunct, 1949-2002)

6.  Grand Tours, various points 

I’m sure some of you may think the Vuelta has been short changed. Contador’s win last year has elevated the prestige of the event, but that doesn’t change the fact that the race has really waxed and waned in popularity through the years. It must also be remembered that it wasn’t even always a three-week race, didn’t become a fixture on the calendar until 1955, and was also moved from April to September in 1995. Surely, any number of great riders from the late 40s and early 50s, most notably Coppi and Bartali, would have added Spain’s Grand Tour to their palmares, had the race been held on a regular basis*. As with the World Champ RR, points have been awarded for the podium spots due to the importance of these events.

      Tour of Italy (Giro d’Italia)(1909) 

       1^st, 6 points; 2^nd, 3 points; 3^rd,1 point

      Tour de France(1903)

       1^st, 8 points; 2^nd, 4 points; 3^rd, 2 points 

      Tour of Spain (Vuelta a Espana)(1935)*

       1^st, 4 points; 2^nd, 2 points; 3^rd 1 point

      *(Race not held from ’37-’40, ’43-’44, ’49, and ’51-’54)  

7.  GT Classification Jerseys, 2 points (Mountains, Points) 

I’ve opted to award 2 points to both the Mountains and Points classification jerseys for each of the three Grand Tours. There is no doubt that the Points competition in the Tour is more prestigious than those of the other Grand Tours, but it must also be mentioned that the Giro did not institute their version of this competition until 1966. I also opted to exclude the Best Young Rider classification from the mix, as it is a fairly recent competition, only added to the Tour in 1981. It is also worth considering that each Grand Tour uses a different scoring formula used for these classifications; it is quite possible that a uniform method in each competition would have produced different winners in certain years. In the end, awarding the same number of points for the two major Grand Tour Classification Competitions seemed to make the most sense.

     Giro, Mountains Classification (1933)

     Giro, Points Classification (1966)

     Tour, Mountains Classification (1933)

     Tour, Points Classification (1953)

     Vuelta, Mountains Classification (1935)

     Vuelta, Points Classification (1945)

8.  GT Stage wins, ½ point 

This is another category that was a bit tricky to settle on a proper point value. I was originally going to go with 1 point for each stage win, but doing so really altered the final standings; it created an imbalance in the overall scoring, placing too much of an emphasis on results in Grand Tours. It is also worth considering that there is a completely different dynamic involved when going for victory in a stage of Grand Tour. Oftentimes the fight for the General Classification will dictate whether or not a member of the team is allowed to fight for victory, which is never an issue when it comes to one-day races outside of Grand Tours. There were certainly situations when the strongest rider on any given day was not allowed to compete for victory. Also, I realize not all Grand Tour stages were created equal, and without doubt, certain stages carry far greater prestige for the victor, usually famed mountaintop finishes. Once again, I opted for simplicity here, and just awarded the same points across the board. I do think it all balances out in the end; the great sprinters rack up their points and get a bonus for Points Competitions, and the famed mountain men usually get a high place on GC and/or the Mountains prize.

9.  Season Long Competitions, 2 points 

Ever since the UCI started awarding this honor back in 1989 the value of the competition has declined somewhat. I suppose it goes hand-in-hand with their globalization effort, and along with it, including events that aren’t really marquee races. The past few years have really been a bit of a mess, with the UCI and the Grand Tour organizers in a spat. I don’t see how you can possibly have a season long competition without including the biggest and best races on the calendar, most prominently the Tour. In any event, at least prior to the 90’s, the winners of these various competitions were more often than not the same names that appear on final Top 25 list.  

     Unofficial Season Long Competition (’36-’39, ’46-’47)

     Desgrange-Colombo Trophy (’48-’58)

     Super Prestige Pernod Trophy (’59-’88)

     UCI Road World Cup (’89-’04)

     UCI ProTour Competition (’05 - '08)

     UCI World Rankings ('09 - present) 

10.  Hour Record, 3 points  

Yes, technically this is a track event, but a roadie has almost always held the record, so I’ve opted to include it. Only those who have set the UCI record (riders are restricted to using roughly the same equipment that Merckx used in his record breaking 1972 attempt) have been awarded points. It’s really the only valid way to make comparisons between the various attempts. Once aerodynamic bikes, helmets, handlebars, and wheels entered the equation, the record became somewhat irrelevant, as technology (and blood doping, as confirmed by at least Moser) played too large of a role in the final outcomes.

     UCI Record (“Merckx Record”), 3 points 

So there you have it. That wraps up the basic framework for scoring The Top 25 Cyclists of the Modern Era. Scoring, Part 2 will review the bonus points earned for Significant Lifetime Achievements and the Missing Years Adjustment Formula. 

I was somewhat disheartened after reading a recent interview with Remy Di Gregorio (photo, right), a young up and coming climber on the French Francaise des Jeux squad. When asked about legendary climbers of the past, such as Bahamontes, Ocana, and Van Impe (photo below), he had this to say: “That’s not my generation. I’m not really a student of the sport, or a historian. I’ll watch old clips if they’re on TV, but beyond that…” Hmm, so if it weren’t for stumbling across footage on TV, Di Gregorio, a pro, would know almost nothing about the champions of bygone eras. Well, at least he has the luxury of catching some cycling history on the tube. We here in the States should be so lucky, and it is one of the primary reasons I launched this site – I wanted to provide another window on the past for fans of pro cycling.

I recently asked a fellow blogger (to remain anonymous) to provide a link to The Virtual Musette on their site, as I had provided a link to his/her’s here. The response went something like this: “I might, but your site just has too much of a focus on cycling history." Uh, okay. I   guess I’ll take that as a “no” to providing the requested link, as I plan to continue marching to my own beat, thank you very much.

Of course, not all my articles are related to cycling history, as evidenced by the recent post featuring Linus Gerdemann. To date, the most popular article on this site was the one written about Astana’s exclusion from the ’08 Tour. I’ll agree, nothing sells like current news, especially when controversy is involved. That said, there are already a ton of English language websites, blogs, and forums focused on the current race scene. My day wouldn’t be complete without my regular fix of cycling news, but I wanted to do something a little different with The Virtual Musette.

I started following pro cycling right around the time Greg Lemond was recuperating from his hunting accident in the spring of 1987 (the 1986 Tour winner took a shotgun blast to the chest when his brother-in-law heard some rustling in the bushes, thought Greg was a wild turkey, and pumped him full of lead). Those were back in the days when the only real sources of news on the Euro scene in the US were VeloNews and Winning. I would practically camp out at my local bike shop in eager anticipation of the arrival of each new issue of these publications, as I was too broke to afford an actual subscription. VeloNews was certainly a godsend for fairly timely news, but Winning brought it all to life. Andy Hampsten’s epic journey through the snow and sleet of the Gavia pass in the ’88 Giro, and Greg Lemond's triumph in the pouring rain at the '89 World Championships (photo, above right) were the stories and images that sparked my passion for the sport.  Of course, it was literally months after these races had been completed before the magazine ever made its way into my hands, but I devoured the stories and photos as if I hadn't known of the outcomes well in advance.  God, I miss Winning, and to this day I wonder what happened to the magazine; it just seemed to disappear sometime during the late 90s.

Those were also the days before OLN (Outdoor Life Network, or the Only Lance Network, as it was sometimes affectionately called).  Daily coverage of Le Tour on TV didn't exist; back then The Greatest Show on Earth was televised on CBS Sports. An entire week’s worth of racing in France was boiled down into one broadcast on the weekend, which was at best an hour-and-a-half in duration. The most infuriating part of this coverage was that you were never quite sure when it was going start, and how much of the broadcast was going to get dropped. On the West Coast, Tour coverage usually followed a live broadcast of some kind. I cursed the programmers for CBS for the many times my beloved race was preempted for the benefit of some damn car race or golf tournament.  Erratic TV schedule aside, I have fond memories of those early Stone Age Tour broadcasts, along with their cheesy John Tesh (photo, left) music and cheesy John Tesh narration.

Anyway, up until the Lance years, cycling coverage was not exactly abundant. Then Big Tex (photo, right) started his domination of the Tour, and along with it came the explosion of the internet.  Today we even have live coverage of most of the Classics (at least when Cycling.tv is actually working).  Yet, despite all the increased access to cycling information over the past decade, I found that I still knew very little about the sport’s history. Over the past several years I’ve undertaken a concerted effort to familiarize myself with earlier decades and time periods, particularly that of the late ‘40s through the mid ‘80s. I’ve obviously been a diehard fan for quite some time, but my newfound appreciation for sport’s rich cast of characters before the Lemond years has taken my obsession to new heights.

This blog was the inevitable outgrowth of my infatuation with pro cycling.  I felt compelled to share my enthusiasm with a new generation of cyclists and fans, and with those who might want to learn more about the legends, races, and lore of our sport. One day, maybe I can look back and smile, knowing that The Virtual Musette, in some small way, played a part in making sure that the giants of road, and the tales of their epic deeds, were not forgotten.  Ultimately, if I can help to deepen someone's appreciation for the sport, then this site will have accomplished its mission.  

Photo credits:  Remy Di Gregorio, CyclingFans.com; Lucien Van Impe, Flickr gallery of Michiel Crijns; Greg Lemond, Cycling Hall of Fame; John Tesh, DavisLamdaChi.com; Lance Armstrong, BBC Sports. 

In a horrendous motor paced track accident in 1969 Eddy Merckx (photo right) suffered a concussion and a cracked vertebra, worse, his pacer driving the derny was killed instantly. Although it’s hard to believe given “The Cannibal’s” absolute domination of the sport for the six years following the accident, Eddy claimed he was never the same and suffered for years with back pain, especially while climbing. It’s intriguing to think that the most prolific winner of all time could have possibly won even more, or perhaps could have extended his career. 

Louison Bobet (Photo left) was tormented by severe saddle sores throughout his career, a condition which ultimately required surgery after he suffered through his win in the 1955 Tour de France. These were no mere boils, as 150 stitches were required to close gaping wound. Ouch. Yet, despite this ongoing affliction, Bobet still managed to win three consecutive Tours (’53-’55), a World Championship (‘54), and every Monument save Liege. Did his recurring problem cause him to lose out on more victories? 

 Both Bernard Hinault and Laurent Fignon (photo right)  were sidelined by knee injuries. Hinault’s injury caused him to abandon the 1980 Tour, although he did go on to win the World Championship later that year. “The Badger” went on to win the Tour in both ’81 and ’82, but the injury flared up again, and he was forced to miss the event in ‘83. Hinault returned for the ’84 Tour, but was soundly defeated by the young Fignon, who had also won the previous year in his first attempt at La Grand Boucle in Bernard’s absence. The tables turned in 1985 and it was Fignon who would sit on the sidelines with his own knee problems. Unable to defend his crown, “The Professor” would helplessly watch Hinault go on to capture his fifth, and final, Tour de France. 

It’s fair to say that Fignon never really regained the form from his early career, even though he did go on to claim the ’89 Giro. Unfortunately, poor Laurent will probably always best be remembered not for his victories, but for his crushing final time trial defeat at the hands of Greg Lemond in the last stage of the 1989 Tour. Fignon had narrowly missed his third win in the most famous of races by a mere eight seconds; his highest placing afterwards would be a sixth in 1991, ironically just one spot ahead of Lemond.

None of the great champions mentioned above suffered what could be considered a career ending injury. The case can certainly be made that Merckx, Bobet, Hinault, and Fignon all could have won more had it not been for their setbacks, but none of them had large chunks of their cycling careers “lost,” as did Bartali, Coppi, Kubler, and Magni during WWII. It should also be noted that Coppi struggled throughout his career with both illness and injury, and it’s absolutely amazing that he was able to accomplish so much given all his bad luck. 

Of course, this discussion would not be complete without mentioning the down time of America’s two great Tour champions, Greg Lemond (photo left) and Lance Armstrong. Their stories have been well documented elsewhere, and are quite familiar to even casual fans. Suffice to say, Lemond was shot in a hunting accident in 1987, and Lance Armtrong was diagnosed with testicular cancer in 1996. Both returned to the top level of the sport, but both also effectively lost two full years of their cycling careers due to their setbacks. 

In the end, I have chosen to use a Missing Years Adjustment Formula to compensate all of the following for their time off the saddle: Gino Bartali, Fausto Coppi, Ferdinand Kubler, Fiorenzo Magni, Greg Lemond, and Lance Armstrong. Certainly, this approach is not without its faults, but I think it paints a more accurate picture of the true potential of cycling’s greatest riders. 

Remember, this series of articles is part of a greater work, The Top 25 Cyclists of the Modern Era.  As the next step in this process, I’ll explain the entire point scoring system, including the Adjustment Formula mentioned above, and all the races I’ve chosen to include. The various pieces of this puzzle will eventually fall into place, and all of this background material will make a lot more sense once the whole project is completed. All of these related articles can be accessed in a special area of this website. First locate the “Navigation” section in the shaded area to the left, and from there, click on the “Top 25 Cyclists…” 

As always, thanks for reading.

Photo credits:  Eddy Merckx, Stephen Vanfleteren/Panos Pictures; Louison Bobet, L'Equipe; Laurent Fignon, original source unknown; Greg Lemond, Greg Lemond Official Web Site

So, who were the two cyclists to pull off this extremely rare feat? If you’ve think you’ve got it figured out, then click on the names from the list below. If you’re correct, you’ll be taken to the rider’s biography compliments of Cycling Hall of Fame. If you’re wrong, you’ll be treated to a classic photo (for all the wrong reasons). Remember, your looking for both of the correct names, not just Merckx (duh). Also, next to the names are the dates of their Tour wins.

 Philippe Thys (’13, ’14, ’20)

 Adre Leducq (’30, ’32)

 Gino Bartali (’38, ’48, and still the record for the longest span between victories)

 Fausto Coppi (’49, ’52)

 Louison Bobet (’53-’55)

 Jacques Anquetil (’57, ’61-’64)

 Felice Gimondi (’65)

 Jan Janssen (’68)

 Eddy Merckx (’69-’72, ’74)

 Bernard Hinault (’78, ’79, ’81, ’82, ’85)

 Greg Lemond (’86, ’89, ’90)

 Laurent Fignon (’83, ’84)

It is also worth mentioning that there have been only three other Grand Tour winners to have also won Flanders: Rudi Altig (’62 Vuelta), Fiorenzo Magni (a three-time Giro winner who won a stunning three consecutive Flanders from ’49-’51), and finally Gianni Bugno (winner of the ’90 Giro, photo left). Bugno’s Flanders win came in 1994, becoming the last Grand Tour winner to accomplish the feat.

As a comparison, 12 cyclists have achieved victory in both the Tour de France and Paris-Roubaix. Since only two have been able to accomplish the even more rare Tour/Flanders combination, the conclusion would seem obvious – the Tour of Flanders must be the most difficult single-day race on the calendar. Agree or disagree? I’d love to hear your opinions. 

Photocredits: (Above right) The legendary Roger de Vlaeminck grunting his way up trecherous Koppenberg.  I am not sure of the year of this photograph, but Roger did win Flanders in '77, along with capturing his record-setting 4th Paris-Roubaix that same Spring Classics season. Compliments of Wikipedia/Mick Knapton.  Gianni Bugno, Bike Race Info.

On the 3rd of November Cycling Revealed will kick off their annual Winter Trivia Contest. I’ve written about this before, but for the uninitiated here is how it works: Each Monday, November 3 - March 30, CyclingRevealed.com posts a five-question quiz. Usually this "test" is of the multiple choice variety, but sometimes you will have to fill in the blanks. You will have 3 minutes to complete each quiz, so there will be no time to Google an anwer. Each quiz is worth 15 points, and the leader board is periodically updated, usually at least once a month. All the details can be found here, but you will not be able to register until the first quiz is posted. There is no prize for the winner, other than the huge bragging rights that are conferred with wearing the crown of King or Queen of Winter Trivia. It’s loads of fun (yet, quite stressful at the same time), and it’s a great way to bone-up on your cycling history.

I will be registering along with many of my friends over at Podium Café, which is a unique, and quite popular, cycling website. PdC, as it’s known to the regulars, is a combination of a traditional cycling blog and fan forum. The blog contributors can be anyone who is registered with the site through SB Nation, which is an entire network of similar fan supported sports websites. Blog entries are created through the “Fanposts” section. Many folks simply choose to participate in the forum discussions via the “Comments” area of each blog heading, at least until they get the hang of things. PdC is the only cycling forum in which I participate; absent is the mean-spirited harpooning that goes on at many of the other forums. Forum *“trolls” are definitely not tolerated, and are quickly ostrasized from the group. New members are definitely welcomed with open arms, so don’t be afraid to create a login and start participating in the chatter. If you would like to expand your knowledge of the professional road racing scene with a great bunch of knowledgable, passionate, and gracious cycling fans, then you will definitely want to visit Podium Café.

*Forum "trolls" are people that go from site to site trying to create disharmony amongst the forum members.  These individuals get some type of sick satisfaction out of being a complete jackass.

All images compliments, and copywrites of, Cycling Revealed and Podium Cafe.