Contador vs. Froome

[Walkman]

Re: Re:

Contador might have won 5 tours between 2007-2011.

I think this is an extremely important point. Many people point out that froome is the stronger rider because he has won more tours and thats the race which really matters and really shows who is the strongest. However if Contador had not been in the wrong team in 2008 and hadn't got caught in 2010 there is a pretty big chance he would have won five tours before froome even became a gt rider and that argument wouldn't exist.
What I'm trying to say is that you should rather use the more tour wins argument as an argument for why froome is more successful not for why he is stronger

LOL
Is this a joke?

Along the same lines, Froome could have won 6 Tours (2012-2017) and 2-3 Vueltas. You see, I can also make a hypothetical argument.

If anything, two of his first two GT:s were won because Levi was held on a leash. Give Levi free rein and he probably wins the 2007 Tour and the 2008 Vuelta would have been pretty darn close as well.

The Froome narrative is actually more probable as well. Froome lost in 2012 och 2011 because of Team orders. AC lost in 2010 because of a doping violation and he has only him self to blame for his lackluster results in the Tour in the other years. His involvement in Operation Puerto. The fact that none wanted to hire him after his 2007 TdF victory (I wonder why..). He only got a team when Bruyneel took over Astana.

And even if some here don't want to realize it, Contador benefitted greatly from the fact that he is Spanish. Him escaping a conviction in the Operation Puerto was due to his nationality and the (corrupt) Spanish authorities. Almost every GT top rider was taken out during the years before Contador hit the scene in 2007. He didn't dethrone anyone as someone once said here, simply because, there was none left to dethrone.

Ullrich, Basso, Vino, Hamilton, Mancebo, Landis, Heras.

Al of them caught, giving him his chance at being top dog. Never in the history of the sport has so many top riders been caught in such a short time span. Contador was gifted a golden opportunity. The backing of Bruyneel (we all know what that means), the protection from the Spanish authorities together with a decimated competition.

The chosen one? I doubt it.

 

[KyoGrey]

It's not only that one has proven himself in all 3GT and the other doesn't. There are other things to consider when factoring who is a better stage racer.

Have you ever taken notice of their records in the most prestigious 1-week stage races?

In Paris-Nice, Tirreno, Pais Vasco, Catalunya, Romandie, Dauphiné, Suiza:

Contador has like 30 top-10 finishes, including like 20 podium spots of which 7 are victories. Podiumed in all 7 of them except Suisse.

Froome has a meagre 11 top-10 finishes, 7 podium spots and 5 victories. All his results in Romandie and Dauphiné, and a podium in Tirreno in 2013.


The only reason we are debating this is because Froome has hit his prime years when Contador faded so you get that impression. From 2013 onwards the Briton has been stronger than the Spaniard except in 2014. And even if his fading years it has been Contador and not uber-strong Froome who has produced more moments worth remembering for the history of the sport.

 

[KyoGrey]

Re: Re:

Contador might have won 5 tours between 2007-2011.

I think this is an extremely important point. Many people point out that froome is the stronger rider because he has won more tours and thats the race which really matters and really shows who is the strongest. However if Contador had not been in the wrong team in 2008 and hadn't got caught in 2010 there is a pretty big chance he would have won five tours before froome even became a gt rider and that argument wouldn't exist.
What I'm trying to say is that you should rather use the more tour wins argument as an argument for why froome is more successful not for why he is stronger

LOL
Is this a joke?

Along the same lines, Froome could have won 6 Tours (2012-2017) and 2-3 Vueltas. You see, I can also make a hypothetical argument.

If anything, two of his first two GT:s were won because Levi was held on a leash. Give Levi free rein and he probably wins the 2007 Tour and the 2008 Vuelta would have been pretty darn close as well.

The Froome narrative is actually more probable as well. Froome lost in 2012 och 2011 because of Team orders. AC lost in 2010 because of a doping violation and he has only him self to blame for his lackluster results in the Tour in the other years. His involvement in Operation Puerto. The fact that none wanted to hire him after his 2007 TdF victory (I wonder why..). He only got a team when Bruyneel took over Astana.

And even if some here don't want to realize it, Contador benefitted greatly from the fact that he is Spanish. Him escaping a conviction in the Operation Puerto was due to his nationality and the (corrupt) Spanish authorities. Almost every GT top rider was taken out during the years before Contador hit the scene in 2007. He didn't dethrone anyone as someone once said here, simply because, there was none left to dethrone.

Ullrich, Basso, Vino, Hamilton, Mancebo, Landis, Heras.

Al of them caught, giving him his chance at being top dog. Never in the history of the sport has so many top riders been caught in such a short time span. Contador was gifted a golden opportunity. The backing of Bruyneel (we all know what that means), the protection from the Spanish authorities together with a decimated competition.

The chosen one? I doubt it.

But who's talking about The Chosen One? We're comparing Contador's career and legacy to Froome's, not to Coppi, Merckx or Hinault...

It is specially funny that people mention team protection as a way to disregard Contador in the debate, when we all know that one of the key of Froome success is that he is a British rider who rides with a British team with the highest budget in a sport directed by a Briton and in an era where British sport has enjoyed a big advantage and cover (we all know what that means) in the wake of the London 2012 Olympics and beyond.

Contador teams? Please, he has riden in some of the craziest and unrecommended teams of modern era if you want a stable and sucessful career. And it's totally his fault, don't get me wrong.

Had he signed in 2011 with Movistar as he should have, the Vinokourov-Clembuterol pseudo-positive would've never happened (Abarca structures are actually one of the teams that do have influence in UCI) and he would have 4-5 Tours, although some Giro and Vuelta less.

Or had Manolo Saiz been allowed to continue in the Pro Tour with Alberto as team capitain. That would've been a great story.

 

[Walkman]

Re: Re:

Contador might have won 5 tours between 2007-2011.

I think this is an extremely important point. Many people point out that froome is the stronger rider because he has won more tours and thats the race which really matters and really shows who is the strongest. However if Contador had not been in the wrong team in 2008 and hadn't got caught in 2010 there is a pretty big chance he would have won five tours before froome even became a gt rider and that argument wouldn't exist.
What I'm trying to say is that you should rather use the more tour wins argument as an argument for why froome is more successful not for why he is stronger

LOL
Is this a joke?

Along the same lines, Froome could have won 6 Tours (2012-2017) and 2-3 Vueltas. You see, I can also make a hypothetical argument.

If anything, two of his first two GT:s were won because Levi was held on a leash. Give Levi free rein and he probably wins the 2007 Tour and the 2008 Vuelta would have been pretty darn close as well.

The Froome narrative is actually more probable as well. Froome lost in 2012 och 2011 because of Team orders. AC lost in 2010 because of a doping violation and he has only him self to blame for his lackluster results in the Tour in the other years. His involvement in Operation Puerto. The fact that none wanted to hire him after his 2007 TdF victory (I wonder why..). He only got a team when Bruyneel took over Astana.

And even if some here don't want to realize it, Contador benefitted greatly from the fact that he is Spanish. Him escaping a conviction in the Operation Puerto was due to his nationality and the (corrupt) Spanish authorities. Almost every GT top rider was taken out during the years before Contador hit the scene in 2007. He didn't dethrone anyone as someone once said here, simply because, there was none left to dethrone.

Ullrich, Basso, Vino, Hamilton, Mancebo, Landis, Heras.

Al of them caught, giving him his chance at being top dog. Never in the history of the sport has so many top riders been caught in such a short time span. Contador was gifted a golden opportunity. The backing of Bruyneel (we all know what that means), the protection from the Spanish authorities together with a decimated competition.

The chosen one? I doubt it.

But who's talking about The Chosen One? We're comparing Contador's career and legacy to Froome's, not to Coppi, Merckx or Hinault...

It is specially funny that people mention team protection as a way to disregard Contador in the debate, when we all know that one of the key of Froome success is that he is a British rider who rides with a British team with the highest budget in a sport directed by a Briton and in an era where British sport has enjoyed a big advantage and cover (we all know what that means) in the wake of the London 2012 Olympics and beyond.

Contador teams? Please, he has riden in some of the craziest and unrecommended teams of modern era if you want a stable and sucessful career.

Had he signed in 2011 with Movistar as he should have, the Vinokourov-Clembuterol pseudo-positive would've never happened (Abarca structures are actually one of the teams that do have influence in UCI) and he would have 4-5 Tours, although some Giro and Vuelta less.

Or had Manolo Saiz been allowed to continue in the Pro Tour with Alberto as team capitain. That would've been a great story.

Huh?
Were did I talk about team protection? I said Levi was forced to work for Contador and thus giving up his own ambitions, which is true. Contador even whined to Bruyneel about how Levi was trying to win for himself in the time trials. Check you facts. Also, never did I argue that Froome did not have a strong team, I said that Alberto had Lance old team, with all its privileges, which was true in 2007-2009.

And how would him signing with Movistar in 2011 have protected him from the Clenbuterol positive test that was taken in july 2010? Or are you saying that Movistar would have paid the journalist who leaked the news in advance of Contador joining the team to make him be silent? Yeah, because we did hear of Contador only when it was leaked, hmm, I wonder why that was?

And the "the chosen" remark..nevermind.

 

[KyoGrey]

Re: Re:

Contador might have won 5 tours between 2007-2011.

I think this is an extremely important point. Many people point out that froome is the stronger rider because he has won more tours and thats the race which really matters and really shows who is the strongest. However if Contador had not been in the wrong team in 2008 and hadn't got caught in 2010 there is a pretty big chance he would have won five tours before froome even became a gt rider and that argument wouldn't exist.
What I'm trying to say is that you should rather use the more tour wins argument as an argument for why froome is more successful not for why he is stronger

LOL
Is this a joke?

Along the same lines, Froome could have won 6 Tours (2012-2017) and 2-3 Vueltas. You see, I can also make a hypothetical argument.

If anything, two of his first two GT:s were won because Levi was held on a leash. Give Levi free rein and he probably wins the 2007 Tour and the 2008 Vuelta would have been pretty darn close as well.

The Froome narrative is actually more probable as well. Froome lost in 2012 och 2011 because of Team orders. AC lost in 2010 because of a doping violation and he has only him self to blame for his lackluster results in the Tour in the other years. His involvement in Operation Puerto. The fact that none wanted to hire him after his 2007 TdF victory (I wonder why..). He only got a team when Bruyneel took over Astana.

And even if some here don't want to realize it, Contador benefitted greatly from the fact that he is Spanish. Him escaping a conviction in the Operation Puerto was due to his nationality and the (corrupt) Spanish authorities. Almost every GT top rider was taken out during the years before Contador hit the scene in 2007. He didn't dethrone anyone as someone once said here, simply because, there was none left to dethrone.

Ullrich, Basso, Vino, Hamilton, Mancebo, Landis, Heras.

Al of them caught, giving him his chance at being top dog. Never in the history of the sport has so many top riders been caught in such a short time span. Contador was gifted a golden opportunity. The backing of Bruyneel (we all know what that means), the protection from the Spanish authorities together with a decimated competition.

The chosen one? I doubt it.

But who's talking about The Chosen One? We're comparing Contador's career and legacy to Froome's, not to Coppi, Merckx or Hinault...

It is specially funny that people mention team protection as a way to disregard Contador in the debate, when we all know that one of the key of Froome success is that he is a British rider who rides with a British team with the highest budget in a sport directed by a Briton and in an era where British sport has enjoyed a big advantage and cover (we all know what that means) in the wake of the London 2012 Olympics and beyond.

Contador teams? Please, he has riden in some of the craziest and unrecommended teams of modern era if you want a stable and sucessful career.

Had he signed in 2011 with Movistar as he should have, the Vinokourov-Clembuterol pseudo-positive would've never happened (Abarca structures are actually one of the teams that do have influence in UCI) and he would have 4-5 Tours, although some Giro and Vuelta less.

Or had Manolo Saiz been allowed to continue in the Pro Tour with Alberto as team capitain. That would've been a great story.

Huh?
Were did I talk about team protection? I said Levi was forced to work for Contador and thus giving up his own ambitions, which is true. Contador even whined to Bruyneel about how Levi was trying to win for himself in the time trials. Check you facts. Also, never did I argue that Froome did not have a strong team, I said that Alberto had Lance old team, with all its privileges, which was true in 2007-2009.

And how would him signing with Movistar in 2011 have protected him from the Clenbuterol positive test that was taken in july 2010? Or are you saying that Movistar would have paid the journalist who leaked the news in advance of Contador joining the team to make him be silent? Yeah, because we did hear of Contador only when it was leaked, hmm, I wonder why that was?

And the "the chosen" remark..nevermind.

Yes I'm saying that there would've been a good posibility of covering it up.

In the same way that Sky has been able to cover up Froome's scandal with TUE or Henao passport infraction, or in the same way that Rogers got clean of his clembuterol positive or that Armstrong covered his positives back in the day.

We all know how this sport works. You have to be in the right place when this things rise up. And Contador has been historically bad when chosing teams or making powerful enemies (Vinokourov, Bruynell, Armstrong, Movistar) in this aspect.

And your argument of Contador being favoured by Bruynell in Discovery/Astana...Froome would've mentally cracked like a Malteser in the Mariana Trench had he attempted to win the Tour in the 2009 Astana.

 

[Gigs_98]

Re: Re:

Contador might have won 5 tours between 2007-2011.

I think this is an extremely important point. Many people point out that froome is the stronger rider because he has won more tours and thats the race which really matters and really shows who is the strongest. However if Contador had not been in the wrong team in 2008 and hadn't got caught in 2010 there is a pretty big chance he would have won five tours before froome even became a gt rider and that argument wouldn't exist.
What I'm trying to say is that you should rather use the more tour wins argument as an argument for why froome is more successful not for why he is stronger

LOL
Is this a joke?

Along the same lines, Froome could have won 6 Tours (2012-2017) and 2-3 Vueltas. You see, I can also make a hypothetical argument.

If anything, two of his first two GT:s were won because Levi was held on a leash. Give Levi free rein and he probably wins the 2007 Tour and the 2008 Vuelta would have been pretty darn close as well.

The Froome narrative is actually more probable as well. Froome lost in 2012 och 2011 because of Team orders. AC lost in 2010 because of a doping violation and he has only him self to blame for his lackluster results in the Tour in the other years. His involvement in Operation Puerto. The fact that none wanted to hire him after his 2007 TdF victory (I wonder why..). He only got a team when Bruyneel took over Astana.

And even if some here don't want to realize it, Contador benefitted greatly from the fact that he is Spanish. Him escaping a conviction in the Operation Puerto was due to his nationality and the (corrupt) Spanish authorities. Almost every GT top rider was taken out during the years before Contador hit the scene in 2007. He didn't dethrone anyone as someone once said here, simply because, there was none left to dethrone.

Ullrich, Basso, Vino, Hamilton, Mancebo, Landis, Heras.

Al of them caught, giving him his chance at being top dog. Never in the history of the sport has so many top riders been caught in such a short time span. Contador was gifted a golden opportunity. The backing of Bruyneel (we all know what that means), the protection from the Spanish authorities together with a decimated competition.

The chosen one? I doubt it.

Most of what you write has nothing to do with what I posted and generally I have the feeling that you don't really understand what I mean.
What I mean is that many people say that Contador is weaker than froome because most of his wins are in smaller gt's and not the tour and what is most important for a gc rider is that he can also win the tour, something contador did only twice. I generally agree that the tour is way more important but I disagree that contador was on a level high enough to win the tour very rarely. Therefore you can ofc argue that froome is more successful than contador (which at the end is what counts)but you can't simply say he is stronger because contador only had two seasons in which he was strong enough to win the tour while he actually couldn't win because of other reasons than simple strength

 

[LanLions]

I think that one thing must always be kept in mind during the Contador vs Froome discussion, and that is Andy Schleck. If Schleck hadn't had that crash in the 2012 Dauphine then cycling would probably look totally different now. I'm not saying that Andy would have even won a tour, but the impact he would have had on mountain stages would have been significant. For example, imagine the 2015 Tour when Quintana nearly took the lead from Froome. Well, imagine if Andy had been there, not just on the Alpe' but on the previous mountain stages, Andy didn't have the cautiousness that Quintana has, and those later mountain stages where Quintana was stronger would really have been a detriment to Froome. I think therefore Froome would not have had the success he has had if it was not for the departure of Andy Schleck. When Contador was dominating, he was the best and there was no question about it, though Froome has always looked vulnerable, the only time I remember Contador looking vulnerable in his best years was on the way to Morzine. I'd just like to reiterate to cycling fans how wonderful cycling could have been during these dark years if Andy Schleck was still around, the Sky train has ruined mountain stages but imagine if you had Contador and Schleck both attacking Froome together from 50km to go, with the Sky train trying to defend, cycling would be beautiful if it hadn't been for the departure of Andy Schleck.

 

[Hayabusa]

Re:

I think that one thing must always be kept in mind during the Contador vs Froome discussion, and that is Andy Schleck. If Schleck hadn't had that crash in the 2012 Dauphine then cycling would probably look totally different now. I'm not saying that Andy would have even won a tour, but the impact he would have had on mountain stages would have been significant. For example, imagine the 2015 Tour when Quintana nearly took the lead from Froome. Well, imagine if Andy had been there, not just on the Alpe' but on the previous mountain stages, Andy didn't have the cautiousness that Quintana has, and those later mountain stages where Quintana was stronger would really have been a detriment to Froome. I think therefore Froome would not have had the success he has had if it was not for the departure of Andy Schleck. When Contador was dominating, he was the best and there was no question about it, though Froome has always looked vulnerable, the only time I remember Contador looking vulnerable in his best years was on the way to Morzine. I'd just like to reiterate to cycling fans how wonderful cycling could have been during these dark years if Andy Schleck was still around, the Sky train has ruined mountain stages but imagine if you had Contador and Schleck both attacking Froome together from 50km to go, with the Sky train trying to defend, cycling would be beautiful if it hadn't been for the departure of Andy Schleck.

At what point was Froome looking vulnerable in the 2013 Tour?

 

[PremierAndrew]

Alpe and Annecy, though it has to be said he looked fairly in control at Annecy

 

[contador_attacks]

The winner of this year's Tour has to born again to have just 1/10 of Contador's talent. 1/10. It's that simple. Case closed.

 

[Taxus4a]

Yes, in the situation than Contador was those years he could have won a lot of Tours, as Lance did.

But in a normal situation Evans could have won 10 Tours those years (wining the same years lot of races more)

 

[Taxus4a]

Re:

The winner of this year's Tour has to born again to have just 1/10 of Contador's talent. 1/10. It's that simple. Case closed.

I dont know what you mean with talent, but I know that both in a very good moment and age Froome has been better, both in ITT and mountains, and for me that is talent.

Or maybe you mean talent with this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziIKZS3hSuA 😉

I think you mean talent the capacity to make very good attacks of 2 Km, very difficult to follow, so you can attack several times in a race. That is visual, yes, everybody loves attacks. But talet is more than that.

 

[Red Rick]

Something that's entirely different between the two is career trajectory, and as a result how reputation builds up and develops through the career. Contador won the 2nd GT he road, aged 24, the Tour (aka the big one), won al 3 by the time he was 25, and from that moment he went unbeaten in GTs for almost 4 years, and 6 GTs. Then he lost the Tour, aged 28, and then he got banned. After that, there was almost no way he'd get back to that kind of dominance, so he'd always be 'past his best' in some way.


Froome did nothing for the first 3 years of his career, and after he took off it took him almost two years to win his first GT, and then another two to win his 2nd. He's 4 GT wins into his career, and he's the same age Contador was at the time of his last victory. I'm well aware of different career trajectories and yadayadayada. But he's been worse since 2015, and a new generation of competitors is rising.

I think the time of Froome's domination will soon be at an end, and then we'll see how he'll manage when his era is over.

 

[Tonton]

Dangerous discussion and thread...

Atomic vs. atomic-er. Clinic stuff to me. Bad thread.

 

[Netserk]

Dangerous discussion and thread...

Atomic vs. atomic-er. Clinic stuff to me. Bad thread.

Evil tongues would say the same about a hypothetical Bardet vs. Pinot thread 😉

 

[Jspear]

Re: Re:

The winner of this year's Tour has to born again to have just 1/10 of Contador's talent. 1/10. It's that simple. Case closed.

I dont know what you mean with talent, but I know that both in a very good moment and age Froome has been better, both in ITT and mountains, and for me that is talent.

Or maybe you mean talent with this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziIKZS3hSuA 😉

I think you mean talent the capacity to make very good attacks of 2 Km, very difficult to follow, so you can attack several times in a race. That is visual, yes, everybody loves attacks. But talet is more than that.

When I think of good talent I think of someone that showed potential at a young age instead of magically showing up in their late 20's.

 

[Ruby United]

Re: Re:

The winner of this year's Tour has to born again to have just 1/10 of Contador's talent. 1/10. It's that simple. Case closed.

I dont know what you mean with talent, but I know that both in a very good moment and age Froome has been better, both in ITT and mountains, and for me that is talent.

Or maybe you mean talent with this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziIKZS3hSuA 😉

I think you mean talent the capacity to make very good attacks of 2 Km, very difficult to follow, so you can attack several times in a race. That is visual, yes, everybody loves attacks. But talet is more than that.

When I think of good talent I think of someone that showed potential at a young age instead of magically showing up in their late 20's.

Interesting.

When I think of good talent, I think of someone who has good talent.

I guess we have different definitions. 😕 😕


(Anyways, according to your definition, Carlos Betancur is a better talent than Froome.)

 

[Valv.Piti]

We cannot know for sure, and I would tend to say this discussion is one for the clinic, but I also do think Betancur is the better talent of the two of them.

 

[Red Rick]

Cycling talent is purely physiological, and thus hard to define.

 

[dacooley]

Re:

The winner of this year's Tour has to born again to have just 1/10 of Contador's talent. 1/10. It's that simple. Case closed.

the only thing you are bringing with that kind of statement is froome being brilliant and astonishingly talented athlete.

 

[GJB123]

There is hellovulot of doping talk going on in the latter parts of this thread, me thinks.

 

[contador_attacks]

Re: Re:

The winner of this year's Tour has to born again to have just 1/10 of Contador's talent. 1/10. It's that simple. Case closed.

the only thing you are bringing with that kind of statement is froome being brilliant and astonishingly talented athlete.

Contador is a rare talent. Riders like him, Boonen, Hushovd, Freire, Cavendish, Petacchi, Cancellara, Devolder, Gilbert, Pozzato, Ballan, Valverde, Cunego, Andy Schleck, Basso, Menchov, di Luca, Sami or Purito define a generation.

 

[silvergrenade]

Re:

We cannot know for sure, and I would tend to say this discussion is one for the clinic, but I also do think Betancur is the better talent of the two of them.

Okay who do you think is more talented: Tyler Hamilton or Carlos Betancur?

 

[arvc40]

Re:

I think that one thing must always be kept in mind during the Contador vs Froome discussion, and that is Andy Schleck. If Schleck hadn't had that crash in the 2012 Dauphine then cycling would probably look totally different now. I'm not saying that Andy would have even won a tour, but the impact he would have had on mountain stages would have been significant. For example, imagine the 2015 Tour when Quintana nearly took the lead from Froome. Well, imagine if Andy had been there, not just on the Alpe' but on the previous mountain stages, Andy didn't have the cautiousness that Quintana has, and those later mountain stages where Quintana was stronger would really have been a detriment to Froome. I think therefore Froome would not have had the success he has had if it was not for the departure of Andy Schleck. When Contador was dominating, he was the best and there was no question about it, though Froome has always looked vulnerable, the only time I remember Contador looking vulnerable in his best years was on the way to Morzine. I'd just like to reiterate to cycling fans how wonderful cycling could have been during these dark years if Andy Schleck was still around, the Sky train has ruined mountain stages but imagine if you had Contador and Schleck both attacking Froome together from 50km to go, with the Sky train trying to defend, cycling would be beautiful if it hadn't been for the departure of Andy Schleck.

Schlecks time as a Tour Contender was over after 2011 even if he had avoided injury, Same as Contador.

 

[Red Rick]

Andy Schleck is younger than Froome. His time wouldn't have been over after 2011. The 2012 route was a confirmed joke, but I'm not sure that Quintana is a better rider than Schleck.

A healthy Schleck would've made every single one of the last 6 Tours a lot better, that's for sure.