Stephen Roche

davyjose

Sure it's TDF season, and all the talk is about Nicolas tonight, so why not discuss how his Dad is percieved in the pantheon of cycling greats. for me, he hit his purple patch at the right time, as the badger had retired, fignon was waning, and Lemond was injured.
But his own career effectively ended a year later. For my money, he is untouchable as Ireland's greatest individual achiever, his achievements in '87 are sickeningly impressive. But many would rate kelly as the superior rider (not me - 2 grand tours consecutively is an insane indicator of talent).
He would have won, had he not been injured in '88, but moreso Lemond would have. But in the post-Merckx era he was one of the closest to an all-rounder i think you'll see. He had it all, in terms of the main disciplines - climbing, TTing, the classics, and he could put the hammer down at the line when called for.

But I'm not sure how Roche is looked upon in terms of the cycling community. I get the impression he's a bit of a forgotten man. Certainly, in terms of irish sporting heroes he is (i had a long flight a few months ago, and couldn't find one biography on him to read).

I think he had the 88 tour, and either a Giro or Vuelta in him, had he not done his knee in.

i personally think he's easily one of the top ten riders of the last 20 years. Any opinions?

Dura Ace

davyjose wrote: »

Certainly, in terms of irish sporting heroes he is (i had a long flight a few months ago, and couldn't find one biography on him to read).

There were 2 Roche books, "The Agony and the Ecstasy" and "My Road to Victory". Both now out of print.

Moflojo

Dura Ace wrote: »

There were 2 Roche books, "The Agony and the Ecstasy" and "My Road to Victory". Both now out of print.

Then of course there's the Paul Kimmage book 'Rough Ride'...:rolleyes:

JacksonHeightsOwn

Perhaps the football team in 1990 and 1994 have somehow relegated Stephen Roches' achievements to a distant memory

I know for me, I don't remember it, granted, I was only 7

But I do remember as a child my dad bringing me to all the kellogs races, and I had a poster of Sean Kelly on my wall, while my older brother had Roche,

It is a shame that he's not remembered and revered alot more than he is, but I'd blame both the drugs in the sport and the fact he doesn't live in Ireland and is, as we say, out of sight is out of mind

But to think our small nation produced a triple crown winner is quite staggering

Sure britains highest placing in the tour is 4th, and when you look at it like that, Roche should really be our best known sportsman

niceonetom

I predict bad things in this thread.

Guybrush T

davyjose wrote: »

Sure it's TDF season, and all the talk is about Nicolas tonight, so why not discuss how his Dad is percieved in the pantheon of cycling greats. for me, he hit his purple patch at the right time, as the badger had retired, fignon was waning, and Lemond was injured.
But his own career effectively ended a year later. For my money, he is untouchable as Ireland's greatest individual achiever, his achievements in '87 are sickeningly impressive. But many would rate kelly as the superior rider (not me - 2 grand tours consecutively is an insane indicator of talent).
He would have won, had he not been injured in '88, but moreso Lemond would have. But in the post-Merckx era he was one of the closest to an all-rounder i think you'll see. He had it all, in terms of the main disciplines - climbing, TTing, the classics, and he could put the hammer down at the line when called for.

But I'm not sure how Roche is looked upon in terms of the cycling community. I get the impression he's a bit of a forgotten man. Certainly, in terms of irish sporting heroes he is (i had a long flight a few months ago, and couldn't find one biography on him to read).

I think he had the 88 tour, and either a Giro or Vuelta in him, had he not done his knee in.

i personally think he's easily one of the top ten riders of the last 20 years. Any opinions?

I'm not really part of the cycling community, but in my opinion while Roche's 1987 is certainly a higher peak than Kelly's best (if you are in a group that includes only you and Eddy Merkx, you know you've done something special) when you compare their Palmares Kelly is well ahead.

You can argue that if Roche didn't suffer from knee problems he could have done more, but then if I was more talented I could have won 8 consecutive TdFs;). Only what you actually did counts.

I'm not too sure about him being forgotten, when I talk to non cyclists, they all pretty much remember Roche and Kelly as the greats of Irish cycling, and some remember Kimmage for heckling Lance:)

Funkyzeit

niceonetom wrote: »

I predict bad things in this thread.

Happy to oblige...;)

Whilst his achievements were obviously superb and the summer of 87 is never to be forgotten - for me he'll always play second fiddle to Kelly.

The Conconi affair definitely left a sour after taste at the end of his career and rightly or wrongly that I just see Kelly more as a 'man of the people'

ROK ON

I never quiet understood the Kelly Roche devide.
Kelly is loved and Roche is held in high esteem. Which is interesting in that as a pro Kelly was not loved by the peleton. He had a rep as an awkward mean bollix. ISTR that onr year e attacked thru a feed zone. But in ireland he is loved whereas Stephen doesn't inspire the same ardour. Most people who know something about cycling (not me) always seem to say that Roche had a beautiful style of cycling.

TinyExplosions

I suspect it could be because Kelly is still very much approachable, he cycles quite a few of the sportive events, and when there has time for anyone and everyone, and is never rude to people when they ask daft questions, or ask him to pose for a photo or anything. He comes across as a genuinely nice guy, still very humble about everything (for example I've never heard him say "when I won this stage/race/etc" during commentary unless pushed about it).

Roche doesn't come across this way -he turned up to his own event (I think), but that's pretty much it, he comes across as living in France, doing his own thing and seems to have pretty much turned his back on Ireland (in cycling terms I see Kelly being a lot more visible and doing a lot more to promote the sport directly and indirectly than Roche). I've also heard him refer time and time again to his win on Le Tour, and while it's a fantastic achievement, it smacks a little of blowing your own trumpet.

Also, Kelly won a couple of Roubaix's, which is my favourite race, so for me he wins hands down -keep your grand tours, but if you manage to win on the cobbles, you are an instant legend!

-note that all the views above are my own, and based on the perception I have of the two, and my well be wildly inaccurate!

Morrisseeee

Personally I think its fantastic that we have both of them, both very talented, both achieved superlative feats in cycling, and most of all we in Ireland should be very proud of them.
(I hope this thread can stay on track & not go down that well worn route of bickering! (puns intended )).

Jawgap

Dura Ace wrote: »

There were 2 Roche books, "The Agony and the Ecstasy" and "My Road to Victory". Both now out of print.

ABE books is always a good bet for picking stuff like that up for a reasonable price:-

http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/SearchResults?bt.x=76&bt.y=11&sts=t&tn=My+Road+to+Victory

ROK ON wrote: »

I never quiet understood the Kelly Roche devide.
Kelly is loved and Roche is held in high esteem. Which is interesting in that as a pro Kelly was not loved by the peleton. He had a rep as an awkward mean bollix. ISTR that onr year e attacked thru a feed zone. But in ireland he is loved whereas Stephen doesn't inspire the same ardour. Most people who know something about cycling (not me) always seem to say that Roche had a beautiful style of cycling.

I remember being taking a great interest in cycling through the 80s and following the not only the whole Kelly / Roche story but the wider sport.

Even though Roche was a Dub, I still would plump for Kelly over him - which is not to denigrate Roche's achievements. I think Kelly's story is much more engaging - left school early, working as a brick layer, the time with Metz etc. His style of riding to me always looked less cultured and more brutish - put it this way, where Roche would use a scalpel to dissect an opponent, I think Kelly's preferred weapon of choice was the sledgehammer!

IMO, Roche's style and his own story is a bit more "aristocratic" than Kelly - I'm not sure if that makes Kelly a "better" cyclist than Roche in an objective sense, but given the subjective nature of the question, there is unlikely to be a definitive answer.

Actually, maybe Roche was the better cyclist - I don't recall Haughey hopping on the government jet to gatecrash any of Kelly's victories:)

Did Roche ever test positive for doping?

I know Kelly did a couple of times

trad

To my mind it's a pity that both Kelly and Roche were of the same era. Because of this they are both constantly compared and contrasted. Both should be held up as icons of Irish sporting achievement. I was "lucky" enough to have ridden a race or two with both of them. Kelly came back down through the group for John Short and Alan Mc Cormack and off they went, never to be seen again. I rode a couple of Junior events with Roche and you could see the class.

Most men follow thier women. For Kelly home was always in Ireland, his wife is from Carrick, sure they even named a square after him. Roche married a french woman, pro cycling is a continental sport so what's the problem with him lving in France.

For me it has to be Kelly over Roche but only by the smallest margin. Two great cyclists that did much to make us proud.

tunney

niceonetom wrote: »

I predict bad things in this thread.

Whats the name of the rider thats widely accepted to have introduced EPO to the pro-peleton?

Chips Lovell

tunney wrote: »

Whats the name of the rider thats widely accepted to have introduced EPO to the pro-peleton?

Francesco Conconi is widely credited with it.

bbosco

ROK ON wrote: »

ISTR that onr year e attacked thru a feed zone.

Not something Roche was averse to, ask Jeff Bernard

I grew up in the same area as Roche and yet preferred Kelly, as a kid and still today. I think with Roche he seemed to have it all going for him: immense natural talent, style, charm. Whereas Kelly, the Animal, the mono-syllabic answers, the ****-stained shorts in the Vuelta, the sheer longevity of his success, winning classics and then being competitive in two tours per year, high-speed punch ups with Vanderaerden....there's just something special about Kelly.

I wonder if the reaction to Kimmage and to the Festina affair had an effect on Roche's legacy in Ireland. I was living outside the country at the time but I remember my folks (who are not cycling fans) telling me that Roche came across quite badly in the immediate aftermath of the Festina affair (which was a big deal in Ireland what with the Tour starting in Dublin a few days later): attacking Kimmage on the radio, defending the sport when it seemed indefensible. I know my folks still remember that and would hold it against him. Maybe others have a better memory of this?

iregk

I think Kelly is held in a higher regard over here due to his continued involvement in Irish Cycling. From An Post to the W200 and everything in between gives him a man of the people vibe where as Roche has concentrated on his businesses post career and that has moved him away from the public view somewhat.

For me its always been Roche above Kelly. The Giro and Le Tour in a single year is super human. Injury killed additional achievements I feel but thats ifs and buts. I've met Roche twice and both times I thought he was a smashing guy and very approachable. Likewise I've met Kelly and would have similar things to say about him.

I know two guys that have raced against Kelly, going back quite a number of years now, and they have said he is an absolute a**hole on the bike in a competitive race. I've never raced the man so I don't know.

I recall one of my greatest memories of cycling I think '92 or '93 when Roche was back at Carerra. He was essentially brought back in for strong support for Chiappucci then a young nieve rider. I think it was Sestriere they were climbing but I could be wrong. The riders went as a group into the dense fog out of camera shot for about 20 mins. At the summit a long rider emerged. Then I smiled and though, he still has it, the man is still class.

Junior

ROK ON wrote: »

I never quiet understood the Kelly Roche devide.
Kelly is loved and Roche is held in high esteem. Which is interesting in that as a pro Kelly was not loved by the peleton. He had a rep as an awkward mean bollix. ISTR that onr year e attacked thru a feed zone. But in ireland he is loved whereas Stephen doesn't inspire the same ardour. Most people who know something about cycling (not me) always seem to say that Roche had a beautiful style of cycling.

Read Fignon's Autobiography if you think Kelly wasn't held in high regard by the Peleton, Fignon has nothing but the highest of praise for the man and the cyclist.

ROK ON

Junior wrote: »

Read Fignon's Autobiography if you think Kelly wasn't held in high regard by the Peleton, Fignon has nothing but the highest of praise for the man and the cyclist.

I think most of his contemporaries hold him in very high regard now. I recall that he was feared both for his talent and attitude when he raced.

I have read interviews with Lemond, Van Der arden, Yates etc when they all said they simply hated racing against the man. You could never relax in that even for a top pro he was deemed ultra competitive. Which i guess why his palmares is so full.

Back to Roche while i cried when he won tdf and Worlds i was enthralled by Kelly. Every so often Sports Stadium would show snippets of his previous weeks race.

My favourite cyclists were Kelly Millar and Lemond.
Millar was crucial in Roches Giro win. To this day Lemond belives that if Kelly hydrated on the bike (which was not deemed important) that he would have won the Tour.

Jawgap

ROK ON wrote: »

My favourite cyclists were Kelly Millar and Lemond.

Big +1 on that - quite enjoyed the book about Millar (In Search of Robert Millar).

It's like any sport - what you appreciate in a competitor will largely dictate who you like - I'd go for Kelly over Roche, in the same way I much preferred Senna to Prost (even if Prost won more); Jimmy White to Steve Davis; McEnroe to Borg, Agassi to Sampras etc etc

RichTea

Kelly for me. It's more down to personal preference than anything else. Each had tremendous achievements throughout their career.

PaulOB1

Roche was unbelievable in 87 with 2 grand tours and the world championship. His victory in the tour remains my favouite Irish sporting victory. However Kelly is easily in the top 10 cyclists off all time! He won 4 of the 5 monuments a total of 9 times, the third highest number of monument wins in history. The monuments are 5 of the top 9 races of the year with the tour, giro, veulta and world championship. He came 2nd in the one he didn't win 3 times. He has won the green gersey in the tour and veulta 4 times each in addition to winning a grand tour, the veulta. He is the most dominant rider of the 80's and was ranked number 1 in the world for 6 years. The following link is worth having a look at if you wish to gauge where Kelly and Roche sit in the panthean of cyclists.
http://www.thevirtualmusette.com/

Junior

ROK ON wrote: »

I think most of his contemporaries hold him in very high regard now. I recall that he was feared both for his talent and attitude when he raced.

I have read interviews with Lemond, Van Der arden, Yates etc when they all said they simply hated racing against the man. You could never relax in that even for a top pro he was deemed ultra competitive. Which i guess why his palmares is so full.

Back to Roche while i cried when he won tdf and Worlds i was enthralled by Kelly. Every so often Sports Stadium would show snippets of his previous weeks race.

My favourite cyclists were Kelly Millar and Lemond.
Millar was crucial in Roches Giro win. To this day Lemond belives that if Kelly hydrated on the bike (which was not deemed important) that he would have won the Tour.

I think they held him in high regard then as well, they just didn't like or understand his toughness, but Fignon showed something of him when he said in a Milan - San Remo that he (Fignon) was going to attack on a hill, Kelly moved up beside him and told him he'd want to move up, Fignon said if he didn't get away he'd lead him out in the sprint. Fignon attacked and Kelly let him go, a deal was a deal. So I think there's more facets to Kelly that people give credit for..

IM0

Tour, Giro, WC same year - that is all. only equalled by merckx and no one else :cool:

Russman

Like most people are saying, its a matter of opinion.
For me its Kelly, even though Roche's achievements are fantastic, based on his consistency and longevity. My first memory of cycling is watching him win Roubaix in 1986 on TV and being enthralled.

I also think the pre-eminence in the last 15 years or so of a certain high profile English speaking rider with a huge PR machine has lead to a much greater emphasis being placed on the TdF. While TdF was always important, back in Kelly & Roche's day, the classics, Giro, Vuelta and the likes of Paris Nice and Tour of Switzerland were much higher profile than now and attracted equally good "fields". Try telling a Belgian that RvV isn't the most important race in the season !!

Izoard

I can absolutely see the arguement for King Kelly, but my No. 1 TV sporting moment of all time (and believe me, I'll devour anything except horse racing:)), is Ligget's "It's Roche!" moment on La Plagne in '87.

I've never been off a bike since.

K-9

Izoard wrote: »

I can absolutely see the arguement for King Kelly, but my No. 1 TV sporting moment of all time (and believe me, I'll devour anything except horse racing:)), is Ligget's "It's Roche!" moment on La Plagne in '87.

I've never been off a bike since.

I wouldn't be into cycling at all, but to me that is the iconic Irish sporting moment to me. Surprised it was so low on the "Irelands Greatest Sporting moments" programme. Suppose it suffered from being from a generation ago and not being a team sporting moment.

Single Malt

Kelly is hands down best for me, the world's number 1 for many years, Paris-Roubaix twice, absolutely dominated the classics for nearly a decade. I would put him in my top 5 of all time.

That's not to take away from Roche's monumental achievement.

iregk

Apparently to celebrate the anniversary on Wednesday the cycle up Col Du Tourmalet Kelly went up it 1910 style!!! Now that's hard!

BryanL

My family was at the tour a good few years in the 80's and all the |Irish cyclists would chat with you anytime you met them at the start or finish of the stage.
Roche was as friendly as any of them, I remember before the start of the dijon time trial in 87, he just gave us a little salute, even though it was as stressful a moment as any in his carreer? Delgado in yellow and all the expectation on Roche in second place.
I think he handled the kimmage book badly.
But was an huge talent in his day, didn't he walk away with a RAS win and win Paris-Nice in his first year as a Pro.
He only does one Sportive in Ireland, but i wonder is he invited to any more?
Bryan

BryanL

Izoard wrote: »

I can absolutely see the arguement for King Kelly, but my No. 1 TV sporting moment of all time (and believe me, I'll devour anything except horse racing:)), is Ligget's "It's Roche!" moment on La Plagne in '87.

I've never been off a bike since.

Was on La Plagne that day, Roche passed us near the 1Km mark, 56 seconds down and he looked blown.Delgado had ripped through like a bull full of strenght. The whole thing looked lost.

We met Brendan Mooney from the Examiner after the stage and he told us Roche finished 4 seconds down on Delgado:eek:, it was just unbelievable, how deep he dug, no one you'd seen his face would have said it was possible.

el tel

Stephen Roche's achievements are a monument however I was really surprised when he made those comments about not wanting to raise his children in Ireland where there are drug dealers on every corner. I have been looking for a reference but can't find it!It was a long time ago that he said that but from someone who, in a European sense at least, is well known, I thought it was a quite damaging to the country.

RobFowl

He was quite bitter after the Tour win at the lack of sponsorship offers from Ireland. Everyone wanted a piece of him but they mostly wanted it for free !!!

I always preferred Kelly but possibly in the way that football fans always look down on the Man U prawn sandwich brigade.

There was a sense that everyone loved Roche at the time because of the tour while us "proper cyclists" had known about Kelly's results long before they all jumped on the Tour result in 87.

iregk

RobFowl wrote: »

There was a sense that everyone loved Roche at the time because of the tour while us "proper cyclists" had known about Kelly's results long before they all jumped on the Tour result in 87.

In years to come everyone will remember the fact that Spain won the world cup in 2010. Very few will remember that Brazil were the current confederations cup champions.

RobFowl

iregk wrote: »

In years to come everyone will remember the fact that Spain won the world cup in 2010. Very few will remember that Brazil were the current confederations cup champions.

I can tell you Shay Elliot came 3rd in the vuelta in 62 and wore yellow in the TDF in 63 but can't remember who won either

Jawgap

Roche hit a rich vein of form and whatever the arguments about the field being weak in the TdF in 87, you can only beat the guys you're racing against - he did it. did it well and grabbed his opportunities with both hands.

Class, however, is timeless - Kelly had (and has) class.

07Lapierre

RobFowl wrote: »

I can tell you Shay Elliot came 3rd in the vuelta in 62 and wore yellow in the TDF in 63 but can't remember who won either

Some fella called "Jacques" wasn't it?

Chips Lovell

The Tour de France is not the World Cup.

RobFowl

07Lapierre wrote: »

Some fella called "Jacques" wasn't it?

?? Lance "Jacques" Armstrong

Chips Lovell

Jacques Anquetil only won because Lance Armstrong didn't enter that year.

RobFowl

el tonto wrote: »

Jacques Anquetil only won because Lance Armstrong didn't enter that year.

Anquetil was on drugs anyway, so Lance was the moral victor...

BGT

BryanL wrote: »

My family was at the tour a good few years in the 80's and all the |Irish cyclists would chat with you anytime you met them at the start or finish of the stage.
Roche was as friendly as any of them, I remember before the start of the dijon time trial in 87, he just gave us a little salute, even though it was as stressful a moment as any in his carreer? Delgado in yellow and all the expectation on Roche in second place.
I think he handled the kimmage book badly.
But was an huge talent in his day, didn't he walk away with a RAS win and win Paris-Nice in his first year as a Pro.
He only does one Sportive in Ireland, but i wonder is he invited to any more?
Bryan

Roche is doing one in Kildare this month, its on leinsterloop.com. Heard him on local radio last weekend, reckons he is only interested in doing a few, rather than taking up every offer that comes along. Runs a hotel in Nice, apparently.

Don't think there's any need for a divide in Kelly/Roche debate. Different riders, Kelly was stronger, Roche probably classier. Such a freak situation that thsi small Island should produce 2 of the best at the same time.

Limestone1

RobFowl wrote: »

He was quite bitter after the Tour win at the lack of sponsorship offers from Ireland. Everyone wanted a piece of him but they mostly wanted it for free !!!

I remember he did some cheese ad where he popped his head out from behind a newpaper and gave a big cheesey grin ...made me cringe every time I saw it ...I'd say that ad killed a lot of potential sponsorships

mloc123

BGT wrote: »

Runs a hotel in Nice, apparently.

Oh, did he mention he runs a hotel? He doen't usually go on about it much....

jwshooter

BGT wrote: »

Roche is doing one in Kildare this month, its on leinsterloop.com. Heard him on local radio last weekend, reckons he is only interested in doing a few, rather than taking up every offer that comes along. Runs a hotel in Nice, apparently.

Don't think there's any need for a divide in Kelly/Roche debate. Different riders, Kelly was stronger, Roche probably classier. Such a freak situation that thsi small Island should produce 2 of the best at the same time.

he could do with the exercise ,the size of him gone

High Nellie

They were both great but in different ways. It's like comparing a full-back and full-forward in a football team and asking which was the greatest.
There is no doubt that Kelly was winning the likes of Roubaix and the general public in Ireland took little or no notice. In 'public' terms, the 'Kelly/Roche' era began when the Dub was picked up by the Irish media. This, of course, wan't Roche's fault.
Isn't it just great that we can claim them both, and that both are still contributing so much to the profile of the sport.

nuclearned

Kelly punching the air (did he come in fourth?)when Roche won the worlds twas like he had won himself,they both gave us terasured memories,

spyderski

It's possible that the lack of sponsorship from Ireland was due to the fact that (bit like now) no-one had a pot to piss in at the time. Roche comes across as hungry - constantly mentioning the hotel etc., but Kelly wouldn't be the first man to the bar either, from what I've heard.
Anyway, both international cycling legends from this little island, at the same time. Lets hope the next generation can produce more of the same.