Originally Posted by chasm54

Up to a point. I agree that one can't make meaningful comparisons between eras. But what distinguishes Merckx (and, to a slightly lesser extent, Coppi and Hinault) is the extent of their superiority over their contemporaries. Merckx was untouchable, he raced three times a week during the season and in his best years won half of those he started. And looked at from a European perspective I don't think it is true to say that cycling in the 60s and 70s lacked the athletic depth that it has today. In Belgium, France, the Netherlands and to a degree, in Spain and Italy, cycling was massive, it was a route out of poverty for tough kids in the way that boxing was in the same era in the States. There are an awful lot of names from that time that still rank with the best, and Merckx crushed them repeatedly. I think we can take it that someone with his gifts and determination would be superior in any generation.