Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

I can easily fancy Tom easily surviving with Froome, Uran and Bartet on Mont du Chat.

No way.
Let's take a moment to analyze his giro. He won with merit because he proved to be the strongest. no doubt. But if we analyze each mountain stage it is almost always dropped: blockaus, stelvio, piancavallo, foza. Only to oropa was in front but all in all it was a climb suitable for him. Not to mention that quintana was at 70% of its possible and nibali is clearly fading phase.

Blockhaus was good enough climbing to be there. Umbrail probably too.

 

[Matteo.]

Blockhaus stage was about an effort in a singular climb, the stage of chambery included 3 climbs 10km @10%.

 

[dacooley]

Re: Re:

I can easily fancy Tom easily surviving with Froome, Uran and Bartet on Mont du Chat.

No way.
Let's take a moment to analyze his giro. He won with merit because he proved to be the strongest. no doubt. But if we analyze each mountain stage it is almost always dropped: blockaus, stelvio, piancavallo, foza. Only to oropa was in front but all in all it was a climb suitable for him. Not to mention that quintana was at 70% of its possible and nibali is clearly fading phase.

70? We are having a talk about the sport where single seconds define the outcome. I'd give Quintana something like 95% from his optimal fitness. He was superb on Blockhaus, but after the crash he sustained on the stage won by Jungels, Nairo didn't stay the same and started fading. Presumably that's just been a season when he eventually couldn't reach his top conditions.

 

[Matteo.]

70, 80, 67.9....the question does not change: He was at his level once. :lol:

 

[Red Rick]

Re:

Blockhaus stage was about an effort in a singular climb, the stage of chambery included 3 climbs 10km @10%.

Yeah, that was what? 3 30 minute efforts, the first one of which was done super slow. I don't think what Dumoulin did on the Passo Gardena is all that bad compared to that. He followed that up with basically being one of the strongest on the climb to Pontives.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Those 6% on that horribly designed Dolomite stage is something completely different to Biche, Colombier and Chat tho. But I think its useless to speculate, he may or may not have survived Mont du Chat, there is no way of knowing that.

 

[Red Rick]

It's just drag being less of an issue. Dumoulin showed on the Umbrail that he can handle 3 huge climbs on a day. And that was on very high altitude too.

Looking at the 2015 Vuelta, I don't think Dumoulin performs that differently on shallow and steeper climbs. Length, duration and repetition are way bigger factors.

 

[Valv.Piti]

I do think the Stelvio-stage is a lot better comparison as those stages were equally hard and I do think 6% compared to 10% is a huge deal. Drag, but lighter riders do also get a greater advantage on those climbs. But I can see good argument that he would have stayed in the group, but also rode his own tempo and lost something like 30 seconds on the top.

 

[dacooley]

Re:

I do think the Stelvio-stage is a lot better comparison as those stages were equally hard and I do think 6% compared to 10% is a huge deal. Drag, but lighter riders do also get a greater advantage on those climbs. But I can see good argument that he would have stayed in the group, but also rode his own tempo and lost something like 30 seconds on the top.

Depends on how he would've performed in GC by that point. Not that Chat was ridden all out this time.

 

[Red Rick]

Re:

I do think the Stelvio-stage is a lot better comparison as those stages were equally hard and I do think 6% compared to 10% is a huge deal. Drag, but lighter riders do also get a greater advantage on those climbs. But I can see good argument that he would have stayed in the group, but also rode his own tempo and lost something like 30 seconds on the top.

It's obviously very hard to directly compare climbs and stages directly, so you also kind of need to compare them relative to their respective fields, etc.

You could make arguments for the comparisons Oropa=Planche, Blockhaus=Izoard, Bormio=Chambery and that's probably it.

Oropa and Planche were effectively one climb stages ridden very hard, though Oropa saw more action and differences because the hardest big is some 4km from the line.

Izoard and Blockhaus are effectively one climb stages as well, Blockhaus witht he fals flat lead in, and Izoard with Vars being ridden slowly. Both were attacked from very far out

I think the Grand Colombier and Stelvio were ridden very similarly. Both at tempo, and both with a ~25 rider peloton. Big difference is here that the Stelvio is 1200m higher in altitude and that climb is almost double the duration, so it's effect on the final climb is likely larger. It needs to be said that the gaps over the Umbrail were smaller, and the Umbrail was probably paced slower up until the attacks started, whereas the Mont du Chat was largely trained by Nieve.

The only riders we have who rode both climbs are Quintana and Landa, though Landa came from the break in the Giro stage. For Quintana it's obvious he was very bad in the Tour, and he crested the Mont du Chat, what, a minute after the lead group?

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

average wattages suggest Dumoulin's giro level on finishing climbs is right up there with the best 3 of TDF.

But yeah, effect of Sky train could be different. We'll have to wait until next year.

 

[Climeon]

Re: Re:

For Sky and Froome fans it's just party time in July for the next few years. For the rest of us we can only hope for someone new to step up their game and become the new world beater in the grand tours. Unfortunately, I don't see anyone on the horizon that seems on the verge of becoming the cause for our hope.

"World beaters" tend to develop really fast. Ok maybe not quite as fast as the Froome transformation but still it often only takes 1 year from hearing to their name to the guy smashing everything. You don't need to see them on the horizon, they will arrive to us.

Shock transformers (Guys who performed in a GT on a level that came out of nowhere) that won a GT post Lance:

Wiggins, Froome, Horner.

That's a great list of people.

Also, riders like Cobo and Hesjedal look like Sastre compared to these guys, it's really hilarious.

His point, I believe, is that the very best riders tend to go very quickly from coming to some prominence to attaining a top top level. Examples of this would be Quintana, Landa, Aru, Bardet, Pinot etc who were on a high level were quickly after coming to prominence.

 

[Rollthedice]

Re:

average wattages suggest Dumoulin's giro level on finishing climbs is right up there with the best 3 of TDF.

But yeah, effect of Sky train could be different. We'll have to wait until next year.

Of course. He could fall asleep on the Sky train.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Re: Re:

average wattages suggest Dumoulin's giro level on finishing climbs is right up there with the best 3 of TDF.

But yeah, effect of Sky train could be different. We'll have to wait until next year.

Of course. He could fall asleep on the Sky train.

For excitement, it would be better if Nibali tries the Tour again.

 

[jsem94]

Nibali probably will go to the Tour anyway after having went for the Giro two years on the trot. If Froome dismantles him this Vuelta though I can't see him upsetting Sky next year.

 

[offbyone]

Re:

average wattages suggest Dumoulin's giro level on finishing climbs is right up there with the best 3 of TDF.

But yeah, effect of Sky train could be different. We'll have to wait until next year.

I still kind of think of Dumoulin more like a Bradley Wiggins. Meaning he has a chance to win a GT, but only if the course is just right. I will be eagerly awaiting his next attempt.

 

[Valv.Piti]

I think its fair to say Froome has been declining steadily, but very slowly from 2013 to now. He was very good in Vuelta 11, great in Tour 12 and incredible in 2013, a level he only replicated in one, maybe two Tour stages ever since, La Pierre Saint Martin 2015 and the hilly time trial in 2016. I don't buy the arguments that he is holding anything back, but 2015 was the end of the dominating Armstrong-esque displays in the mountains. For good and for worse because that means he is riding a lot more conservatively, he and his team.

However, he is still the obvious favourite for the Vuelta for many reason, one of them being a declining Nibali is his biggest competitor.

 

[offbyone]

Re:

I think its fair to say Froome has been declining steadily, but very slowly from 2013 to now. He was very good in Vuelta 11, great in Tour 12 and incredible in 2013, a level he only replicated in one, maybe two Tour stages ever since, La Pierre Saint Martin 2015 and the hilly time trial in 2016. I don't buy the arguments that he is holding anything back, but 2015 was the end of the dominating Armstrong-esque displays in the mountains. For good and for worse because that means he is riding a lot more conservatively, he and his team.

However, he is still the obvious favourite for the Vuelta for many reason, one of them being a declining Nibali is his biggest competitor.

I thought he was pretty darn good last year in the vuelta if you take away when he got crushed missing those splits. I wonder if he will be better this year because he seemed to have a much lighter build up to tour and maybe he is fresher? Who knows. Can't wait for the vuelta though.

 

[Parker]

Re:

I think its fair to say Froome has been declining steadily, but very slowly from 2013 to now. He was very good in Vuelta 11, great in Tour 12 and incredible in 2013, a level he only replicated in one, maybe two Tour stages ever since, La Pierre Saint Martin 2015 and the hilly time trial in 2016. I don't buy the arguments that he is holding anything back, but 2015 was the end of the dominating Armstrong-esque displays in the mountains. For good and for worse because that means he is riding a lot more conservatively, he and his team.

I think there was a definite change in focus from him in 2014.

Two things happened. Firstly he crashed in 2014 and then went to the Vuelta with minimal extra training and came second. Secondly, the TUE thing happened with regard to his chest problem in cold weather. So from 2015 he restructured his season to ride both the Tour and Vuelta. And the frustrations of coming second three times at the Vuelta mean it's a massive itch that needs to be scratched.
Therefore, the 2013 Froome was never likely to happen again and the draw of the Vuelta has grown.

If he wins the Vuelta - he'll refocus completely on Tour number five like in 2013.

Of course, he'll be declining as well. I think 2018 is his last really good shot at the Tour.

 

[Taxus4a]

Re:

I think its fair to say Froome has been declining steadily, but very slowly from 2013 to now. He was very good in Vuelta 11, great in Tour 12 and incredible in 2013, a level he only replicated in one, maybe two Tour stages ever since, La Pierre Saint Martin 2015 and the hilly time trial in 2016. I don't buy the arguments that he is holding anything back, but 2015 was the end of the dominating Armstrong-esque displays in the mountains. For good and for worse because that means he is riding a lot more conservatively, he and his team.

However, he is still the obvious favourite for the Vuelta for many reason, one of them being a declining Nibali is his biggest competitor.

I dont think Nibali or Froome are declining, it is how to say Rigo was decling last year, and this year he has got his best GT position.

Every race has his circunstances, Brainsfold said this is the best Tour from Froome, and mayve it is possible.
I know looking at Froome wining in Mont Ventoux, or the way he won in la Pierre is mote expectacular or amazing at a first sight, but with good wether and after some flat stages Froome that performance is normal in Froome. With the same parcours he would have done similar, IMo, with the difference this year he is aiming seriously la Vuelta as well, so he took it easy before le Tour, and maybe could have been a little bit stronger at the begining of le Tour other way, but very little. think is the same Froome. There were rain some days, and Froome it is another after some rainy days.

The same way Nibali it is another with good weather. Nibali was 3rd in a Giro without any simple raindrop. For me that has more merit than the Giro he won with extreme cold, anow and rain condition. and his Tour was quite rainy as well. In this Gro he was better than Pinot the same he was better in le Tour than Pinot, one of his main rivals, so I cant see any declining...just better or worse result depend circunstances..

 

[Valv.Piti]

Good points by both, but that was Froome's absolute peak 2013 and we will never see that again. I don't even think we will see anything close to it (PSM was last time and thats 2 years ago). He was a total monster and really didn't need to ride as calculated as he does now, he simply just smashed them. Contador lost 1.45, 1.40, 0.57 (when he bonked) and 2.28 on the 4 MTFs (Ax-3, Ventoux, Huez and Semnoz). But despite that the most scary performance was the flat time trial that Martin barely won, it was a massacre.

I think (and hope) he will have it harder next year, but he will probably still be the favourite, depending on the Vuelta, how next season plays out etc. etc.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Yes, it has something to do with him targetting the Vuelta, but I really don't believe he hasn't regressed or declined a bit since 13.

 

[Tonton]

Re: Re:

The same way Nibali it is another with good weather. Nibali was 3rd in a Giro without any simple raindrop. For me that has more merit than the Giro he won with extreme cold, anow and rain condition. and his Tour was quite rainy as well. In this Gro he was better than Pinot the same he was better in le Tour than Pinot, one of his main rivals, so I cant see any declining...just better or worse result depend circunstances..

That's where your argument derails, my good friend. I agree with the cold weather argument, and this is also true for Il Grandissimo Tibopino. According to stats, watts, e tutti quanti, Pinogiro slightly improved since '14, but not that much. When comparing TdF '14 vs. Giro '17, the time gap has decreased a ton, from over 8 minutes to seconds between TP and VN. I see declining for Il Squalo. In '14 Thibaut distanced Nibali once, Port de Bales, that's it. In '17, different story.

Back on topic: Dawg was lucky that Porte crashed, he was more vulnerable than ever, the rest of the contenders were shy but Porte knew Sky and Froome, he would have attacked. Woudda, shoudda, it didn't happen.

Just like the run atop the Chalet Renard never happened, because Sky (Portal) made a claim to the organizers and got a flat stage ruling on a MTF. The worst thing that could have happened to Chris Froome, although his fans, Phil, and Paul will remember that forever. It didn't happen. Fact. And the legend discussion that took place a few posts ago should have put emphasize on the narrative that makes a legend. The epic.

Hinault was a legend after the '80 LBL, having the out of a ravine episode at the '77 Dauphine, two TdF, several monuments, that ride in the snow. the sleet, viewers like me catching glimpses between interruptions, drinking a hot chocolate, it felt so miserable even in my living room .

How about Eugene Christophe? Never won a Tour. What a story. He's still mentioned in this forum probably ten times per year, one century later.

Portal and Sky stole that from CF. By placing their win at all cost philosophy in the way.

If I were Froome, I would start to go for monuments too, get a AGR, GDL, Strade, be a MAN, not just a robot, which is what pretty much anyone outside of the UK perceives.

 

[movingtarget]

Re: Re:

The same way Nibali it is another with good weather. Nibali was 3rd in a Giro without any simple raindrop. For me that has more merit than the Giro he won with extreme cold, anow and rain condition. and his Tour was quite rainy as well. In this Gro he was better than Pinot the same he was better in le Tour than Pinot, one of his main rivals, so I cant see any declining...just better or worse result depend circunstances..

That's where your argument derails, my good friend. I agree with the cold weather argument, and this is also true for Il Grandissimo Tibopino. According to stats, watts, e tutti quanti, Pinogiro slightly improved since '14, but not that much. When comparing TdF '14 vs. Giro '17, the time gap has decreased a ton, from over 8 minutes to seconds between TP and VN. I see declining for Il Squalo. In '14 Thibaut distanced Nibali once, Port de Bales, that's it. In '17, different story.

Back on topic: Dawg was lucky that Porte crashed, he was more vulnerable than ever, the rest of the contenders were shy but Porte knew Sky and Froome, he would have attacked. Woudda, shoudda, it didn't happen.

Just like the run atop the Chalet Renard never happened, because Sky (Portal) made a claim to the organizers and got a flat stage ruling on a MTF. The worst thing that could have happened to Chris Froome, although his fans, Phil, and Paul will remember that forever. It didn't happen. Fact. And the legend discussion that took place a few posts ago should have put emphasize on the narrative that makes a legend. The epic.

Hinault was a legend after the '80 LBL, having the out of a ravine episode at the '77 Dauphine, two TdF, several monuments, that ride in the snow. the sleet, viewers like me catching glimpses between interruptions, drinking a hot chocolate, it felt so miserable even in my living room .

How about Eugene Christophe? Never won a Tour. What a story. He's still mentioned in this forum probably ten times per year, one century later.

Portal and Sky stole that from CF. By placing their win at all cost philosophy in the way.

If I were Froome, I would start to go for monuments too, get a AGR, GDL, Strade, be a MAN, not just a robot, which is what pretty much anyone outside of the UK perceives.

Porte said during the Dauphine then later in the first week of the Tour that Sky and Froome are not as strong as previous years. He is partially right but Kwia and Landa were so good that Henao's form didn't matter that much. I think Froome was there for the taking at the end of the second week but Uran and Bardet were not the riders to take advantage of the situation. Froome looked like he rode within himself in last year's Tour to save something for the Vuelta but on the basis of his performance in this Tour I'd say that the assumptions made about last year could be wrong. For the majority of the race last year Mollema and Porte and Bardet were able to match Froome in the mountains then Mollema's race fell apart and the damage for Porte had been done earlier in the race.

This year Froome looked under pressure on the mountain stages, his attacks were not successful and it looked like Landa was actually waiting for him on some stages. He looked okay on the final mountain stage but even then his attack came to nothing. His TT is still good but his climbing is not what it was and if you look at the time gap to Uran he won the race on his TTs. Froome did well to salvage the race but if he repeats this form or thereabouts next year I can't see him winning and even more so if Sky lose some of their riders. Froome is also at the age now where a decline is generally seen in GT riders. Evans was an exception to win at 34 which is rare and then declined shortly after anyway. I think this result will only encourage his rivals and it's hard to see a return to the 2015 Froome.

 

[dusty red roads]

In his interview Landa mentions that Froome was telling him to slow down, so that fits in the with the general consensus above.