Contents Page 1
As I said last week when we announced the new book, The Hardmen, we had a much harder time of it writing this one than we did with The Rules. There are a variety of reasons why this is true, not least the fact that we had to actually choose which Hardmen to include in the book, a bigger chore than it might seem. Some of them were pretty obvious, some were pretty obscure, but mostly it was simply a difficult chore to narrow down the list to something we could fit in a single book without turning it into War and Peace.
Not to mention that we were basically working from memory, for our oft-stated Anti-Research Policies.
Given that, there are some major omissions, whether deliberate or otherwise. Maybe we simply didn’t like a particular rider, hardness notwithstanding (Pharsmstrong). Maybe we loved a rider and we acknowledged their hardness, but the hardness was so universal that we couldn’t zero in on a particular ride that would make the book (Boonen). Other riders featured more than once because they were so universally hard but still managed to drop majorly epic rides in often enough that we simply couldn’t keep from adding a few of their stories (Kelly, Merckx).
With that, I give you your weekend assignment: which is the most glaring omission from the book, and why? But here’s the catch: you have to be specific on which rider, and you have to be specific on preciesely which ride/action merits inclusion. Vote for your favorite omission by using the (new) like button*. If you’d like to add your own notes to someone else’s entry, just respond inline as usual. Top three omissions** will receive a free copy of The Hardmen, signed by all three authors (this will take a little time as we have to ship them around the world.)
* I have resisted adding a Like button to posts since Velominati’s inception in 2009, feeling strongly that if you have something to say, you should take the time to say it rather than anonymously tapping a like button. However, given my own limited available time to commit to posting, I have come to appreciate the elegance of being able to recognize a post for its humor without needing to respond to it with something unimaginative like, “Ha!” I hold fast on my view that there will never be a “Dislike” button, as I firmly believe that while you are welcome to dislike something, you need to hold yourself accountable for your remarks.
** We reserve the right to override the voting system and choose the winner at our discretion.
I know as well as any of you that I've been checked out lately, kind…
Peter Sagan has undergone quite the transformation over the years; starting as a brash and…
The Women's road race has to be my favorite one-day road race after Paris-Roubaix and…
Holy fuckballs. I've never been this late ever on a VSP. I mean, I've missed…
This week we are currently in is the most boring week of the year. After…
I have memories of my life before Cycling, but as the years wear slowly on…
View Comments
@sthilzy
He always did look spectacular on a TT bike. And look at Andy, he's like a parachute.
@frank
Ha! Just giving you shit, Mate!
@frank
I think that would be Stage 3 of the 1983 Tour: Valenciennes to Roubaix. The stage was won by Rudy Matthijs. Fignon won that Tour at his first attempt in only his second year as a pro. He was 22 years old. Hinault was out injured so Fignon and Marc Madiot were co-leaders of the Renault team. Stage wins were the goal, but after Pascal Simon retired with a broken shoulder, Fignon inherited the Maillot Jaune and won the race.
In case there was any doubt that he was a deserving winner, in 1984 Fignon won five stages and the race overall by 10:32 from Hinault and 11:46 from LeMond. Robert Millar was 4th at 14:42 and the top 10 was rounded out by Phil Anderson at a whopping 29:16 down.
Who won @frank
@Buck Rogers
I had lunch with Steve (Hampsten) today and we both agree you must be mainlining amphetamine. No normal person has as much energy as you!
@Neil Owens
Now that's the interesting part. Now I have to read all this bullshit you guys wrote!
I'm going to call the comp now, though, and will announce the winner later this week after the other authors get a chance to weigh in.
@frank
@Frank: I do not know him but a certain Sam Garrett translated De Renner into English. He's also translated a whole bunch of other Dutch books into English. So Q is whether he did a good job on The Runner (I only ready De Renner) and whether he can translate VV (sorry, this is vice versa here, not Dime). He may know someone who would be able? And better check out @Alex?
And FWIW: I do not like the like buttons. It's OK to use them whenever you want to poll something, but it means scrolling down even longer on my phone because of all the zeroes and hands that are added.
@frank
Will be a tough decision some brilliant entries here...should provide a good few ideas for volume 2!
@wiscot
I think Fignon as a cyclist is the biggest and most obvious omission from the book. He was our kind of guy, a badass and a Hardman. And he looked Fucking Fantastic.
Who else has dominated the Badger so utterly as Fignon did in the 1984 Tour?
Also worth a mention, didn't Fignon win the stage to La Plagne mentioned in the book where Roche put himself in and ambulance?
There are too few hardmen from the early days, or so it appears to me. Surely Charly Gaul should be included. If only for his ride up the Bondone, securing him the Giro win in in 1956.