Originally Posted by Snicklefritz
I think rankings like Marszalek's are a bit silly even though they are interesting. There are so many ways to define "great". It is so subjective anyway. I mean look at the whole Pro Tour thing and all the problems with that "ranking" system. From Cycle Sport Sept. '05 "no one would dispute McEwens worth to davitamon lotto but that needs to be reflected by the pro tour. after all, which should be recognized as the greater achievement - mcewen's three tour stage wins or hincapie's 15th overall? both were worth 9 points" There are going to be problems with a lot of ranking systems...
I don't think systems like Marszalek's are silly at all. Taking them as the final answer on things is. By creating a system one spends time looking at what is important. Unfortunatly for a system it also is limited to what is measurable, objective and a real reflection of greatness. For example it is much more impressive to really dominate a race as opposed to just winning it, but how does one determine domination? Just winning margin really does not really do it. That becomes clear when contrasting the rider that no one can outsprint or drop to a very average rider who makes a solo break at just the right time. The later has a far bigger winning margin.
The example with Hincape also raises a big issue with just raw numbers. 14th is better than 15th right? so 14th indicates a better rider (at least for the event), right? But what if the rider who was 14th in the TDF when George was 15th was a team leader and all that teams support and all of that riders effort was spent on a good GC placing? In that case it would seem George was the better rider for the event.
All that said I think ranking systems and several ranking systems are an excellent starting point. If you think a rider ranked lower in some system is a better rider than someone ranked higher then it would seem you have to find an explaination. Often that is easy. There can be differences in what different people find important, there can be issues of career longevity or goals, team support and carreer interruption by World Wars just to mention a few. But sometimes the numbers win out and there is no way to support a ranking, something we see on this board all the time with the 99ers.