Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

Page 589 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Froome riding for Movistar would be like Lance riding for T-Mobile in 2005. It makes zero sense. However, in a weird wolrd where Froome is riding for Movistar, there's no way Soler and Mas are given priority ahead of Froome.

I mean, imagine Lotto Soudal telling Gilbert "no, you can't go to San Remo because Degenkolb, De Buyst and Wellens want to go there and have priority over you". Or Total not signing Van der Poel because they have Terpstra, Petit and Turgis already in their ranks.
Hmmm... 1 rider with 4 overall victories. + 2 riders with 0 total top 10's in GC = 3 co-leaders! (Or, 4 co-leaders if we count Valverde's celebrity appearance.)
Seriously, though. The Tour would be 100x more fun with Froome on Movistar.
 
As a cycling (and Roglič) fan i want to see him race the best on TDF 2020. As far as the strategy Team Ineos choose i can perfectly understand it, as there was not much to think about, after the TJV strategy was revealed.

BUT all in all if Bernal would participate in Giro 2020, that would be a move i could understand. As there is just no signs of any internal hierarchy in Team Ineos ATM and i somehow doubt they can sit down and talk it over.
 
@INRNG
L'Equipe on Chris Froome's potential team moves, interesting on the options and workplace politics, last paragraph also mentions a new British team for 2021 which plans to compete with Ineos thanks to the help of a big English sponsor


@PETERCOSSINS
Big piece in @lequipe this morning about the possibility of Chris Froome leaving Ineos. Israel Start Up, Bahrain, NTT & Movistar all cited as options, plus in the very last sentence "a new British team that will be launched next season with an English sponsor"!!!
 
Froome riding for Movistar would be like Lance riding for T-Mobile in 2005. It makes zero sense. However, in a weird wolrd where Froome is riding for Movistar, there's no way Soler and Mas are given priority ahead of Froome.

I mean, imagine Lotto Soudal telling Gilbert "no, you can't go to San Remo because Degenkolb, De Buyst and Wellens want to go there and have priority over you". Or Total not signing Van der Poel because they have Terpstra, Petit and Turgis already in their ranks.

Except it doesn't matter who gets priority if Valverde says Mas and Soler go to the Tour with him they go to the Tour and they won't for Froome. Froome won't have any pull in the team and won't have a team around him. They can sign Froome and tell him he's going to the Tour, but we all know in that team even being a co leader doesn't really mean much if the riders don't want to ride for you.
 
This x10. Mas and Soler are the backup plan for the Tour, and they know it. Again, don't get me wrong, they're both good plays for the future. But, for this year, I'm pretty sure they would both be more than happy to have the team fully support them at the Giro or the Vuelta.

Wrong. Mas and Soler are going as leaders to the Tour with Valverde's support, and then they all 3 go to the Vuelta and Mas and Soler support Valverde there. That was the plan to start with and if we get a season that is still their plan. That means that is the plan of those 3 riders. Mas and Soler have exactly 0 interest in this year's Giro as they are Spaniards and want to be at la Vuelta, but they want to support their leader at la Vuelta and learn from him. The reality of their plan is Valverde is their safety net at the Tour while they provide Valverde a back up plan at la Vuelta if he needs it.
 
Hmmm... 1 rider with 4 overall victories. + 2 riders with 0 total top 10's in GC = 3 co-leaders! (Or, 4 co-leaders if we count Valverde's celebrity appearance.)
Seriously, though. The Tour would be 100x more fun with Froome on Movistar.
Enric Mas has only raced the Tour once and got sick during it and wouldn't have had any support anyway, same as he had no support at la Vuelta when he finished on the podium there. Yes you count Valverde as he'll be a protected rider, do what he wants and likely end up with another overall top 10.
Now if you want to take last year's Movistar team and make the insanity twice as bad, sure put Froome there.
 
Here's an article today, it's in Spanish. It's saying Ineos has said Froome isn't going anywhere this season and according to this article only Israel cycling would even consider taking over his contract.
 
Hmmm... 1 rider with 4 overall victories. + 2 riders with 0 total top 10's in GC = 3 co-leaders! (Or, 4 co-leaders if we count Valverde's celebrity appearance.)
Seriously, though. The Tour would be 100x more fun with Froome on Movistar.
If you put it that way. Of course I want to see Froome riding for Movistar just for the spectacle off the bicycle. Just think about Froome after each stage in that bus!! LOL.
 
Reactions: Jungle Cycle
Even in his current condition i think Froome would have a better chance of winning the tour than anyone on Movistar. Solar and Mas will be sacrificed to get Valverde in the top ten then they will be all in for him at the Vuelta. It isn't surprising their best chance of winning another GT left to go to other teams.
 
Even in his current condition i think Froome would have a better chance of winning the tour than anyone on Movistar. Solar and Mas will be sacrificed to get Valverde in the top ten then they will be all in for him at the Vuelta. It isn't surprising their best chance of winning another GT left to go to other teams.
That's not exactly a controversial opinion. For people who like a bet, Froome is currently equal 2nd favourite for the Tour alongside Roglic and behind Bernal. It's about 50-1 that a Movistar rider wins
 
Reactions: gregrowlerson
According to Marca, when they asked Movistar management about Froome, the response they got was they have not even talked with him and they have no interest in bringing him in currently. This coming from a team that has been fairly consistent in not talking about contract negotiations.

Here's the paragraph from Marca:
Según ha podido saber MARCA, la opción de que el británico firme por el cuadro telefónico en este 2020 está descartada. En el conjunto navarro están muy satisfechos con su nuevo tridente y, pese al divertido guiño de José Joaquín Rojas a 'Froomy' en redes sociales', ni ha habido conversaciones ni existe la intención de contratar al británico.


(edited to add google translate's translation:) As Según has learned, the option of the British signing for the telephone box in this 2020 is ruled out. In the Navarrese group they are very satisfied with their new trident and, despite the funny wink of José Joaquín Rojas to 'Froomy' on social networks', there have been no conversations nor is there any intention of hiring the Briton.
 
Last edited:
Even in his current condition i think Froome would have a better chance of winning the tour than anyone on Movistar. Solar and Mas will be sacrificed to get Valverde in the top ten then they will be all in for him at the Vuelta. It isn't surprising their best chance of winning another GT left to go to other teams.
Of course, Froome has a better chance of winning the Tour this year than anyone on Movistar. Everyone knows that. But Soler and Mas won't be riding for Valverde at the Tour. Everyone SHOULD know that already.
 
Reactions: Koronin
Here's an article today, it's in Spanish. It's saying Ineos has said Froome isn't going anywhere this season and according to this article only Israel cycling would even consider taking over his contract.
So if there is a Tour, Ineos will have three riders, all with designs on winning. Early stages will be critical, because if you fall behind one or two of the others, even by a relatively manageable handful of seconds, you won't be able to attack the leader. But unless one of the three gets a significant gap on the others going into the mountain stages, it's going to be hard to see anyone working all out for anyone else.
 
So if there is a Tour, Ineos will have three riders, all with designs on winning. Early stages will be critical, because if you fall behind one or two of the others, even by a relatively manageable handful of seconds, you won't be able to attack the leader. But unless one of the three gets a significant gap on the others going into the mountain stages, it's going to be hard to see anyone working all out for anyone else.
That is making the assumption they all go. If we get the Duaphine and other racing before the Tour that could even determine if someone is left off the Tour team.
 
The common narrative is that the tour in September instead of July in is Froome's favour because it gives him more time. But it also gives him less racing. Which is imo a bigger negative. He has had one week in a pro peleton in the last year which he spent in the bus. He was a poor bike handler before this. Overall.,it seems like an accident waiting to happen and if I was in the peloton I would steer well clear of him
 
That is making the assumption they all go. If we get the Duaphine and other racing before the Tour that could even determine if someone is left off the Tour team.
Unless the lack of racing has really affected some riders much more than others, I don't see how Bernal or Thomas would be left off the team. Froome, yes, that's a possibility

And they did manage the whole Bernal/Thomas leadership thing pretty well at last years race.
They didn't have Froome last year as a third contender.

Froome seemed pretty OK with Thomas's winning in 2018, but he had the Giro title as a major consolation (particularly as it was his first, and gave him three GTs in a row), and had to expect the double would be difficult. With time running out on a fifth, and his whole season coming down to just the Tour, I wouldn't think he'd be so accommodating this time.
 
Unless the lack of racing has really affected some riders much more than others, I don't see how Bernal or Thomas would be left off the team. Froome, yes, that's a possibility



They didn't have Froome last year as a third contender.

Froome seemed pretty OK with Thomas's winning in 2018, but he had the Giro title as a major consolation (particularly as it was his first, and gave him three GTs in a row), and had to expect the double would be difficult. With time running out on a fifth, and his whole season coming down to just the Tour, I wouldn't think he'd be so accommodating this time.
That is actually where my line of thinking was going. If Froome isn't where he needs to be there is no guarantee he would make the team. I would be shocked if Bernal wasn't ready and likewise with Thomas. But with Froome there is no guarantee he will be ready.
 
@INRNG
L'Equipe on Chris Froome's potential team moves, interesting on the options and workplace politics, last paragraph also mentions a new British team for 2021 which plans to compete with Ineos thanks to the help of a big English sponsor


@PETERCOSSINS
Big piece in @lequipe this morning about the possibility of Chris Froome leaving Ineos. Israel Start Up, Bahrain, NTT & Movistar all cited as options, plus in the very last sentence "a new British team that will be launched next season with an English sponsor"!!!
That new British team wouldn't be (Bahrain-)McLaren?
 
Apr 16, 2017
221
8
3,045
As far as the conflicts that develop when a team has multiple contenders for winning the Tour, the history over the last few years actually is not that bad, at least from the perspective of the team getting results. Setting aside the 2018 and 2019 Tours, in which Thomas/Froome and Bernal/Thomas managed to get podium spots with no apparent conflicts, and the Movistar situation, which I would argue is not particularly relevant, as the only Tour in which there was a Movistar rider who was able to contend for the win and in which there was a conflict would be 2015, and even that is quite possibly not a conflict as much as Quintana feeling a rider did not perform as well as hoped. Even with that, Quintana finished second at the Tour in 2015, which is not a particularly bad result, I would argue.
That leaves us with the Tours of 2012 and 2009, which both had definite conflicts inside teams. Both were ones where definite, specific damage was done to relationships between contenders for the win, and, yet, in both cases, the riders who were in conflict managed to end up with a win and a podium. There may well have been damage done to the long-term relationship of one of the riders with the team, and that is not nothing, but in both instances, the team made the choice to stay with the stronger rider, and were rewarded for doing so with another win (setting aside, of course, the Clinic issues that apply to 2009).
My point being that the road has always decided, whether there is conflict or not, and when there is conflict, its effects are trumped by results. The riders may not see it that way, and may feel betrayed by the team, and may be right in so doing, but from the team perspective, the results are the primary focus, and the means of evaluating what is important to the team.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: SHAD0W93
Actually, ATM Froome likely already is in such position. TJV currently likely is the strongest team and in addition Froome will need to compete with not only his past injuries but with the likes of Bernal and Thomas in his own team.

Not an easy task is ahead. Likely that only motivates him more!
 
Reactions: pastronef
As far as the conflicts that develop when a team has multiple contenders for winning the Tour, the history over the last few years actually is not that bad,
Most of the examples you list are of two teammates competing for the win, not three (you could argue that Astana had four in 2009, but LL crashed out, and more to the point, no one other than Contador was ever going to challenge LA)..

As any physicist knows, the three body problem is far more complicated. If you have two leaders, one of them is usually going to gain separation at a point where the other has to yield and work for him. If you have three, though, you have the possibility of shifting alliances. We got some taste of that from 2009, where Contador in effect was contending against both LA and Klodi, since the latter would have been siding with LA in any conflict with Contador. That probably played into Contador's decision to attack on a key mountain stage, basically knocking Klodi out of contention for second or even third on the GC.

Granted, there was a lot of bad blood between LA and AC that does not appear to be the case with the three Ineos riders, but you also have the wild card situation, where at any point, any two might be fighting vs. the other, the leader. Suppose Bernal takes an early lead,. He wouldn't want either Froome or Thomas sent up the road, because they would be a challenge to him. If one of them did go up the road, I could see the other actually working to let that one go, since it would potentially improve his chances vs. Bernal. And so on. A lot of potential for chaos, it seems to me.

And again, I remind you that Froome in 2018 was less likely bothered by not winning than he would have been in any other year, having just come from an historic Giro win, and knowing how difficult the double would be. If he hadn't ridden the Giro, or worse, finished far out of contention--as had seemed likely for much of the race--I think not winning the TDF would have been a much bigger deal for him. He could afford to be magnanimous to Thomas, because he still had had a great year.
 
Reactions: Summoned
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
F Professional Road Racing 14
F Professional Road Racing 68

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS