Who is the most underwhelming Grand Tour winner?

and he retired a few years later, bought a bar and started working there and his customers made fun of him…he was pretty depressed and went back to working in a factory. The people’s reaction made him embarrassed about his accomplishment

You’re correct that it’s unfair to call ANY winner undeserving, and in fairness it’s probable that whoever won the ‘06 Tour would come across historically as a ’meh’ GT winner. But talk about a soft landing:

• Lance decides seven is enough. Does anyone really think, regardless of what you think the secret to his success is, that he wouldn’t have won this race by ten minutes had he ridden it?

• Thirteen riders, including two strong overall favorites (Ullrich and Basso) and pretty much every legit podium contender, taken from the race at the 11th hour. This created a bevy of riders given the “contender” tag at least a year too early. Was anyone really talking about Sastre, Menchov, or Evans winning the Tour in ’06? Sastre and Menchov were coming off podium finishes at the Vuelta, but Vuelta =/= Tour.

• Then the unthinkable – Pereiro finds his way into the most fortunate breakaway any of us will ever see. By staying at the front of the race with Jens Voigt and taking second on stage 13, Pereiro gains a dumbfounding 29’57" against the main field, making him maillot jaune by a minute and a half over Landis and two and a half over Menchov. This has been talked about a lot over the years, and with obvious – it’s historic. I don’t fault Pereiro for getting half an hour when it was there to be gotten. I fault him, in the context of being a Grand Tour winner, for needing half an hour in the first place. Just two days before the historic breakaway, Pereiro lost 26’26" to Menchov, Leipheimer, and Landis at the front of the race and at least the better part of 25 minutes to the rest of the race’s top overall riders, atop the Alto del Pla-de-Beret in Catalonia for 54th on the day. What kind of Grand Tour winner does that?

• Pereiro doesn’t finish with the top overall riders on Alpe d’Huez, coming in 14th with the Cadel Evans group (hmm…) a minute and a half off the favorites’ pace and loses the yellow jersey to Landis. Then Floyd decides to make things pretty goddamn obvious giving Pereiro the jersey back after his distant 23rd at La Toussuire before his ridonkulous solo “win” the next day at Morzine-Avoriaz.

• Landis is probably a better time trialist even without the juice, so he takes the jersey and stands on the top step of the podium in Paris. But the courts make Pereiro the winner in the forthcoming months.

It’s just a perfect storm of things that had to happen pretty much exactly as they did in order for Pereiro to win. And he did win, and great for him, but it doesn’t shock me that this was the only Grand Tour where he ever had a single-digit final placing.

Totally inexplicable… never lived up to that form again… or even looked like doing so.

Came in a rather flat TdF that most top contenders of the time skipped because they liked other goals better. That edition was bound to have a less heroic winner.

Lesser riders take flyers all the time, and I think it’s harder to have to keep your eyes on your main rivals, as well as make sure breakaways don’t reach Pereiro-like time gaps. One of the most boring TdF’s I can remember was Lance in 2002. No one showed up, his team was stacked and he pretty much just needed to stay upright for 3 weeks. A real snooze-fest. BUT the question is about underwhelming winners, and for me it was Pereiro hands down. Gifted a high finish, won in the courtroom and never did anything to back it up.

I mean, Pereiro won (well in his case, Landis lost the case). But, you get my point, right? Is this more a reflection of the others losing then the underwhelming winner?

Thinking about someone like Walkowiak above (thanks to Andrew for posting those other links). Here’s a guy that was fortunate to win the race, but clearly still loves cycling being that he still does it into his 80s. He’s wearing a yellow jersey in the photo included in Andrew’s post (see above) and in my opinion, whether you like the win or not, he’s one of the few who deserve the honor of wearing the jersey to this date.

My point. Regardless of how it is won, the lowest time wins. You’re the champ. If it’s underwhelming, blame all the others who didn’t beat the guy. Blame the teams who let Pereiro get a half hour on them in the early stage of the race. He won. I kind of get tired of hearing that Pereiro isn’t the winner or isn’t deserving…so name someone who was in that race that was. They gave him the win and he’s chastised for it.

unless they cheat. well, they pretty much all cheat, imho, so i mean if they significantly out-cheat the other cheaters. bringing a gun to a fist fight when all the other guys are bringing knives kind of thing. not that i’m pro doping or anything, but as long as the playing field is level-ish, the winner is deserving of the victory. when the playing field isn’t level, the winner is less deserving.

So whomever won this race was going to do so with somewhat of a Puerto cloud hanging over there head. The fact that it was a guy who never really threatened a podium before or after, just adds to the really empty feeling this race has left with me.

Agreed though, that you cant fault a guy for 18 other teams failing to take him seriously.

but I am assuming you were joking on Sastre. 13 GT top 10’s, 5 GT podiums and some very impressive 2-GT per year with high finishes. He was a stud. His 2008 TdF, was won with no Contador there, but everyone else showed up.