Originally Posted by
merlinextraligh
Incorrect. Armstrong won Fleche Wallone, and the World Championship; Andy Schleck won LBL, Cadel Evans won Fleche Wallone and the World Championshipjust as 3 recent examples. Lemond won the World Championship, and was competitive in the Classics.
Further back Merckx dominated the classics.
Just because, Tour favorites aren't winning the Ronde, and Paris Roubaix doesn't mean they can't win Classics, or major one day races.
That said, you've got a couple of things at work. It's horse for courses, The hell that is Flanders, and Roubaix favors bigger stronger riders.
Second,, specialization. If your focusing on winning the TDF, your likely not going to risk injury in a cobbled classic, and your going to put together a Classics schedule that is focused more on tour prep than winning Classics.
Don't forget Indurain - over 6'2" tall, ~180 lbs and won 5 straight TDF GCs. And Jan Ulrich, who had to keep pulling his jersey down to cover his gut, and he won one TDF and got multiple podiums.
I think the real reason why there are classics riders and grand tour riders is because certain people have natural abilities and attributes that might make them more apt to succeed in one or the other and so they focus on one to the detriment of their performance in the other. A rider planning to challenge for the GC in the TdF will use the spring classics as training and not risk anything for a win if it does not fit into the training plan.
If they changed their focus I am sure many of the great riders could have been successful in whatever discipline they choose.