I've been thinking about ways to respond some more all day...
But everything I was going to say has pretty much been said.
Which is good. It means people understood my question.
I know I'll never be as good as even the worst of them, and I know mindless speculation as to who is better or would be better given different circumstances is a war that could be waged throughout eternity.
It's still fun to talk about.
But, I still think, with the average speeds maintained back then, road conditions, tires, nutrition, gearing, weight, and aerodynamics, that the riders then were stronger and more able to endure than those today, who are undoubtedly more efficient and thus able to go just a little faster, but have it easier to get started and maintain their speed. They can maintain their cadence much easier today because their gearing is suited for twice the environments than they were then (10 speeds versus 20 speeds). I just think that, even with todays proper training, that riders today wouldn't have it so "easy" on a bike 7 pounds heavier and with 10 less gear combinations. That's just me, though.
-Gene-