Yes and yes. As a cycling fan, I have enjoyed several grand tours in recent years, classics races, etc., except for the TDFs where Froome was participating (starting with 2012, when he could have won), because in every one of those events, the outcome was very clear early on -- in those tours it was obvious that Froome was on a physiological level way above everyone else. Strategy is irrelevant because he's boatloads stronger than all other contenders. I maintain that he sandbagged it in this year's TDF to provide a semblance of legitimacy to the thing. The one grand tour where Froome had a competitor on a similar level was the 2014 Vuelta, but that must have an asterisk beside it because Froome was preparing for the TDF that year -- the Vuelta was a backup plan after he crashed out of the Tour. I can accept races where contenders are probably (almost certainly) doping, if the sporting element is there, but when the playing field is not level -- when one guy is playing on a completely different level -- then the event does suck.ontheroad said:Any tour he's ever won he has dominated it from the very beginning and never had a truly bad day when it really mattered. The only possible exception being in this years tour where he lost about 20 secs on a 250m steep ramp. This Vuelta appears to be taking the same path because the majority of the other GC riders are effectively down 2:00+ minutes from the beginning due to time trialling.