movingtarget wrote:I don't call it commonsense to hail Froome as the best rider of his generation when he has not won a GT yet. Only mad people would suggest that, even if he wins the Tour. I would not read too much into the Dauphine. To me Contador looked like he was training apart from the TT where he was inexplicably bad and the sinus issue may have had something to do with it and on the first mountain stage which Froome won, Contador tested the waters and was beaten fair and square. after that he was just helping Mick Rogers hold his podium place. If Contador is beaten in the Tour and admits that he was not ill or injured well we have to assume he was beaten by a better rider at the time. It's funny that often when riders are interviewed they say that they did not have the legs or that others were too good for them, not many admit to losing because of injury or illness. The fans are completely different and often see things that even the riders say are not true. Contador has not had any serious illness or falls or injuries since he won the Vuelta so if he he is beaten in the Tour then in my eyes he has been fairly beaten. Does not matter whether people think he is not at his best or past his best that is irrelevant. It's all about what happens in the three weeks. If Contador can win a difficult Vuelta on a limited preparation he should be good in the Tour unless there is a serious reason for it which we have not heard about so far.
I think it is incredibly premature to call/hail Froome as the greatest rider in his generation--especially since his generation includes Contador. Palamares matter. He needs to rack up a couple of GT victories before we even can begin that conversation