cantpedal said:
The problem with all these arguments is the following " my guy is better because he beat him in this race and wasn't in top shape when he lost in that race." That leaves me with what were the stated goals for a rider at the beginning of the year? He trained with a goal of being in top form for that Race. What were his results?
Everything else is preparation trying to achieve that goal or trying to salvage something from missing that goal. While it may show the strength and character of a rider it doesn't prove he's the best.
+++1
It is so annoying ..the 'my guy didn't beat your guy because he wasn't in top shape' bull. No one knows on here whether someone was in top form or not when they crashed out or earlier/later in the season or a GT, etc. And frankly it has no bearing because being in form for a targeted event and not crashing all part of the performance, every bit as much as sprinting or time trialing
The results are all that matter..That is all anyone can be judged by...Because you can take it to the umpteen level and say the guy in 10th place could have won if he was on a better team or trained harder ,or had a few more days to reach top form. etc.Its the worst kind of speculation...finding excuses for the results or someone's performance. Coming up with arbitrary figures on fitness and weight to justify bias opinions without any real credible evidence. Its pathetic really.No one goes on and says if Manchester United were in better form they would have beaten Chelsea in the premiership in previous years..or if Andy Murray was in better from he would have won more Wimbledon, etc, etc . sportsmanship says the best man won and that is accepted.
The truth is that Chris Froome has won the Tour in 2013 and 2015 and was the strongest rider in the race
He remains in 2016 along with team SKY the ones to beat whether he is stronger in the first or last week is neither here nor there . and what is more the riders themselves know this