The Hitch said:
. . .
Wiggins was asked before the tour- do you want to win the Tour with Froome - best climber in the world, pacing you up every single climb and being your total ***** for 3 weeks, or do you want to try and win it without him.
If yes, then youll have to let him be leader for the 2013 tour.
Looked like a very attractive proposition with london 2012 around the corner and the chance to be a "hero" and to open the ceremony and all that.
Hate to be a pedant, but do you have a link for that? Is that actually a real conversation you're quoting a report of, or an imaginary one?
I hate all this team planning in any case - like Webber getting the hump in that race earlier this year cos he couldn't drive his fast car in a circle as fast as his team mate.
OK, in some cases if you're going to help the opposition you shouldn't attack someone on the road (Froome stopping at Tousiairre (sp?) last year was probably right to stop I think), but if there's no real risk other being better than the 'leader' then you should go - I think Froome should have tried to chase down Valverde in that last mountain stage last year, and I loved it when Contador just rode away into Andorra in 2009. It is, after all, a race.
So I think what Wiggins is saying at the moment is fair enough - if (best case scenario) it comes to it, he wants the road to decide. I think in that scenario Froome will beat him - but what's a better outcome for Froome and his place in history: winning with Wiggins hinting he could have won but didn't try, or winning with Wiggins having tried and failed to compete and there being no discussion about the 'strongest' rider at the tour? If he doesn't think he can actually beat Wiggins, maybe he's in the wrong job?
That all said, Alberto will beat them both!