Riders of yester-year
03-23-09 | 12:15 PM
#26
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,045
Likes: 15
From: Lancaster County, PA
Bikes: '39 Hobbs, '58 Marastoni, '73 Italian custom, '75 Wizard, '76 Wilier, '78 Tom Kellogg, '79 Colnago Super, '79 Sachs, '81 Masi Prestige, '82 Cuevas, '83 Picchio Special, '84 Murray-Serotta, '85 Trek 170, '89 Bianchi, '90 Bill Holland, '94 Grandis
Yeah, I've always lumped them together too. Hey, wasn't there some great champion that said a good pheasant, a bottle of Champaign, and a bit of time spent with a member of the opposite sex was the best preparation? That sounds a lot better than all that nutritional mumbo-jumbo they preach today...
03-23-09 | 04:12 PM
#27
Thread Starter
Buh'wah?!
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,086
Likes: 2
From: Charlottesville VA
Bikes: 2014 Giant Trance
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-
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-
03-23-09 | 06:34 PM
#29
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,244
Likes: 1
From: Auld Blighty
Bikes: Early Cannondale tandem, '99 S&S Frezoni Audax, '65 Moulton Stowaway, '52 Claud Butler, TSR30, Brompton
No so, have a look at Anquetil's approach to racing. While he raced well in excess of 200 days a year (not many racers doing that nowadays), he concentrated on stage races and particularly on the Tour de France. Rik Van Steenbergen and Rik Van Looy similarly concentrated on the Classics.
03-23-09 | 07:40 PM
#30
...rode before legions of adoring fans. Major Taylor set world records and beat all comers while many of the race fans screamed insults and other riders tried to sabotage him, all the while knowing there was a 50/50 chance the race promoter would cheat him out of his winnings.
Its very hard to compare riders of different eras.
tcs
Its very hard to compare riders of different eras.
tcs
It's funny how this post was pretty much comparing Merckx era racers to the present, and the 30-40 year gap in equipment. But if you think about the bikes being ridden in the early 70's, they were at least as advanced over what was being being ridden in the pre-war era as the bikes of today are over the 70's equipment.
So were those guys better that the guys in the 70's? Tougher in certain ways for sure, but not stronger or better racers if you ask me.
You C&V guys just need to accept that are some things that are ok about the present
03-23-09 | 11:33 PM
#32
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,985
Likes: 709
From: Boulder County, CO
Bikes: '80 Masi Gran Criterium, '12 Trek Madone, early '60s Frejus track
My point was that Northern Europeans in particular are taller than they were when Merckx rode, partly attributable to better nutrition during childhood development. I don't think it's a stretch to at least tentatively conclude that if they're growing up taller, they might well be growing up stronger as well, and with more athletic potential. Unless they intend to be jockeys.
As England and Europe from the wreckage of the WWII, the general public health improved and rate of growth of average stature in Europe increased as average stature of North Americans seems to have hit a plateau. Draw your own conclusions.
Merckx, born during the tail end of the war, was relatively tall and robust for his era.
03-24-09 | 12:03 AM
#33
Rustbelt Rider
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,105
Likes: 388
From: Canton, OH
Bikes: 1990 Trek 1420 - 1978 Raleigh Professional - 1973 Schwinn Collegiate - 1974 Schwinn Suburban
Agreed! On a side note, I saw on ESPN today that Lance Armstrong broke his Collarbone. I could be wrong, but it seems like there is a huge anti-Lance movement in some of the other roadie forums. Why is that? I can't pretend to know much about his career but I assume it is mostly because he was king of the hill in a way.
__________________
|^^^^^^^^^^^^^^| ||
|......GO.BROWNS........| ||'|";, ___.
|_..._..._______===|=||_|__|..., ] -
"(@)'(@)"""''"**|(@)(@)*****''(@)
|^^^^^^^^^^^^^^| ||
|......GO.BROWNS........| ||'|";, ___.
|_..._..._______===|=||_|__|..., ] -
"(@)'(@)"""''"**|(@)(@)*****''(@)
03-24-09 | 12:57 PM
#34
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque NM
Bikes: 2003 Colnago Asso 1982(?) Guerciotti
Yes, Armstrong won seven Tours, which no one else has done, but he focused solely on the TDF. Merckx won "only" five Tours, but he also won five Giros, and I believe he did win both in the same year, twice.
He did this with technologically inferior equipment and training regimes as compared to today. In my mind, he holds the bar to which other cyclists are measured.
He did this with technologically inferior equipment and training regimes as compared to today. In my mind, he holds the bar to which other cyclists are measured.
03-24-09 | 02:57 PM
#35
Thread Starter
Buh'wah?!
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,086
Likes: 2
From: Charlottesville VA
Bikes: 2014 Giant Trance
Yes, Armstrong won seven Tours, which no one else has done, but he focused solely on the TDF. Merckx won "only" five Tours, but he also won five Giros, and I believe he did win both in the same year, twice.
He did this with technologically inferior equipment and training regimes as compared to today. In my mind, he holds the bar to which other cyclists are measured.
He did this with technologically inferior equipment and training regimes as compared to today. In my mind, he holds the bar to which other cyclists are measured.
-Gene-
03-24-09 | 04:16 PM
#36
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,985
Likes: 709
From: Boulder County, CO
Bikes: '80 Masi Gran Criterium, '12 Trek Madone, early '60s Frejus track
What made Merckx special is that he was a factor in every race he entered. On the other hand, while he could be beaten in any of those races (except, perhaps, his first TdF), he often was not. What made Lance special is that in his specialty, the TdF, he was unbeatable (except, perhaps in 2003).
Cycling, like all sports, has become more scientific and professional with more specifically target goals. Just like the corporations that sponsor the teams.
03-24-09 | 04:56 PM
#37
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,944
Likes: 853
From: Wilmette, IL
I always enjoyed reading of the English time trialers back in the 60's. Road racing was banned for some reason and time trialing was the rage. They had 12 hour and 24 hour time trials and set distance as well. And alot of the participants were local guys, farmers, laborers, factory workers. They worked a regular job and then did racing for fun. Some even built their own bikes. I like the fact that the equipment back then was more affordable, (Campy was always pricey), and the regular guy could go out on the weekend and give it his sporting best. Now days the equipment is priced out of site. You really have to be a serious biker to race competitively.
There are some time trials coming up in Illinois and I'm going to give it a shot on my Peugeot UO-8. Trying to find some lightweight wheels and tires so that I might be competitive.
There are some time trials coming up in Illinois and I'm going to give it a shot on my Peugeot UO-8. Trying to find some lightweight wheels and tires so that I might be competitive.
03-24-09 | 06:05 PM
#38
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,244
Likes: 1
From: Auld Blighty
Bikes: Early Cannondale tandem, '99 S&S Frezoni Audax, '65 Moulton Stowaway, '52 Claud Butler, TSR30, Brompton
They still have 12 hr and 24 hr time trials, not quite as many nowadays. Check out the Mersey Roads 24 hr TT. Road racing was banned from before the First World War until the Second World War and it only became popular in Britain from the 1960s.
03-24-09 | 06:28 PM
#39
Bicycle Adventurer
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,523
Likes: 8
From: Portland, Oregon
I always enjoyed reading of the English time trialers back in the 60's. Road racing was banned for some reason and time trialing was the rage. They had 12 hour and 24 hour time trials and set distance as well. And alot of the participants were local guys, farmers, laborers, factory workers. They worked a regular job and then did racing for fun. Some even built their own bikes. I like the fact that the equipment back then was more affordable, (Campy was always pricey), and the regular guy could go out on the weekend and give it his sporting best. Now days the equipment is priced out of site. You really have to be a serious biker to race competitively.
There are some time trials coming up in Illinois and I'm going to give it a shot on my Peugeot UO-8. Trying to find some lightweight wheels and tires so that I might be competitive.
There are some time trials coming up in Illinois and I'm going to give it a shot on my Peugeot UO-8. Trying to find some lightweight wheels and tires so that I might be competitive.
Nick
03-25-09 | 01:45 AM
#40
Strong Walker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,404
Likes: 616
From: Black Forest, Germany
Bikes: too many
Well, a comparison of riders of different eras is always difficult, the circumstances under which riders would train and race were so much different.
The UCI with their new hour record rules tries to make times comparable at least for that event. The fact that Boardman and Sosenka only just could top Merckx' old mark by a very few meters shows that a rider with the physis of the cannibal would kick ass today, too...
On the other hand, the first hour record in which more than 40km were ridden dates back to 1898... ever ridden a bike of that era?
The UCI with their new hour record rules tries to make times comparable at least for that event. The fact that Boardman and Sosenka only just could top Merckx' old mark by a very few meters shows that a rider with the physis of the cannibal would kick ass today, too...
On the other hand, the first hour record in which more than 40km were ridden dates back to 1898... ever ridden a bike of that era?
Last edited by martl; 03-25-09 at 01:50 AM.
03-25-09 | 02:17 AM
#41
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 1
They were better back then. There may have been dope back them, but I think was probably less effective than the dope of today, which was/is widespread, so if anything, a doped yesterdays man was probably at a disadvantage to a doped modern rider.
Either way, to ride with a heavier biked, less effective training regime, and something as simple yet limiting as downtube shifters, and to win like Merckx did, that was something. As hungry as Lance is, I know who I'd put my money on.
Remember, a lot of those guys came from a hard background - peasant stock, farmers grown up on the land or manual workers, grown up in the ruins of post war Europe. They knew real hardship. Real hunger. That puts something in you that a training regime and good diet never can.
Either way, to ride with a heavier biked, less effective training regime, and something as simple yet limiting as downtube shifters, and to win like Merckx did, that was something. As hungry as Lance is, I know who I'd put my money on.
Remember, a lot of those guys came from a hard background - peasant stock, farmers grown up on the land or manual workers, grown up in the ruins of post war Europe. They knew real hardship. Real hunger. That puts something in you that a training regime and good diet never can.
03-25-09 | 07:04 AM
#42
Palmer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,151
Likes: 2,261
From: Parts Unknown
Bikes: Mike Melton custom, Alex Moulton AM, Dahon Curl
“I was one of the best British time trialists and I was beaten by 14 minutes over 50km by the European pros. I had to ask myself what was going on. I got dropped in the world championship road race and this Dutchman came up and offered me a handful of pills. He said, 'Make you go fast!'” Dennis Talbot, about racing in Europe in 1955 on the Hercules professional team.
tcs
tcs
03-25-09 | 08:22 AM
#44
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,244
Likes: 1
From: Auld Blighty
Bikes: Early Cannondale tandem, '99 S&S Frezoni Audax, '65 Moulton Stowaway, '52 Claud Butler, TSR30, Brompton
Anti-doping rules only began in cycle racing in 1965. Before then, it wasn't considered cheating. Most top pros were using dope in the 1950s and 60s. There are more ways to dope nowadays.
03-25-09 | 09:13 AM
#45
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,045
Likes: 15
From: Lancaster County, PA
Bikes: '39 Hobbs, '58 Marastoni, '73 Italian custom, '75 Wizard, '76 Wilier, '78 Tom Kellogg, '79 Colnago Super, '79 Sachs, '81 Masi Prestige, '82 Cuevas, '83 Picchio Special, '84 Murray-Serotta, '85 Trek 170, '89 Bianchi, '90 Bill Holland, '94 Grandis
Either way, to ride with a heavier biked, less effective training regime, and something as simple yet limiting as downtube shifters, and to win like Merckx did, that was something. As hungry as Lance is, I know who I'd put my money on.
Remember, a lot of those guys came from a hard background - peasant stock, farmers grown up on the land or manual workers, grown up in the ruins of post war Europe. They knew real hardship. Real hunger. That puts something in you that a training regime and good diet never can.
Remember, a lot of those guys came from a hard background - peasant stock, farmers grown up on the land or manual workers, grown up in the ruins of post war Europe. They knew real hardship. Real hunger. That puts something in you that a training regime and good diet never can.
03-25-09 | 09:51 AM
#46
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,466
Likes: 24
From: Scottsdale, AZ
Bikes: many
I'm quite certain that human beings have not changed appreciably genetically in the last 100 years. That's like asking whether Babe Ruth was better than the baseball players of today. Any given rider, like Eddie, might have had superior genetic potential compared to a particular rider today but that is as much random chance as anything. We don't breed humans like dogs or horses so there is no reason to think that humans being would have gotten better but there is also no reason to think they have gotten worse. Training regimens today are better than they were in the classic period and while riders certainly doped back in the day, the "dope" of today is far more potent and effective than the crude stimulants they were using back then. So my guess would be that if you took a random selection of pros today and had them ride vintage equipment under the same conditions as back in the day, they would be faster on average due to their superior training and conditioning. Now as to whether Lance would be faster than Eddie or vise versa, well, I'll leave that descussion to the same guys that like to argue about the relative merits the Babe and Bronko Nagurski vs. today's players. 
03-27-09 | 07:24 AM
#47
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 1
Your condescension aside, I think that if you reread the part you quote, I'm not just talking about Merckx.
What about Coppi or Anquetil? I doubt you could class their backgrounds as middle class.
What about Coppi or Anquetil? I doubt you could class their backgrounds as middle class.
Last edited by Gotte; 03-27-09 at 08:34 AM.
