It's never hurt to have two potential winners, i.e. when ig happened (85, 86, 09, 12) one of them won the Tour. The first week is a lottery, crashes in '10, '11, punctures '10 (LA), '12 (Froome, VDB2), etc...
Originally Posted by movingtarget
Obviously Rogers and Porte were the mules but Froome did his fair share. I am not saying that Froome would have won the Tour. But if Contador disappears into the distance and Wiggins gets into trouble Froome won't wait and why should he ? Look what happened at the Vuelta in 2011. I agree that Froome has not proved yet that he is a grand tour winner even though his Vuelta 2011 and Tour riders were impressive. I put Froome in the same category as Andy. Has the potential but yet to win a grand tour on the road. Wiggins has improved over the last two years and it will be very interesting to see how much time Contador and the best climbers can actually put into Wiggins in the mountains. Maybe not as much as they hope to.
Yes that will be interesting, clearly Froome will be allowed to follow Bertie if he takes off...provided Wiggo still has someone to pace him, like Hinault/Lemond/Ruttiman (sp?) in 85/86, Sky just need to make sure they're in that situation.
Froome did a great 2012 TDF but I'm a bit annoyed at all the crocodile tears as to how he sacrificed himself and dragged Wiggo, that's complete BS for anyone who watched the race. A bit like Lemond in '85, he did zero work for Hinault and was just told just once by Koechli not to relay Delgado (Hinault had crashed very hard a few days before, the day Lemond attacked with a small group and took 2+ minutes back from his 5+ minute gap in GC) ultra basic tactics and now everyone and their dog states that Lemond had that tour stolen from him...