• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Froome's TdF chances: better or worse without Wiggins?

Froome's TdF chances: better or worse without Wiggins?

  • It's all a bluff: Wiggins will ride anyway

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .
I'm not convinced Wiggins would have added much to mountain support beyond what others in the team can do. He would have been beneficial in the TTT and diverted some of the media attention, but might have given rise to some split loyalties in the team. I'll say it will have a slight negative effect (Froome to win by slightly less time than he would have otherwise)

Admins: if it is possible and deemed preferable to merge this with the "Wiggins could miss TDF due to chest infection, knee injury " thread, no problem by me: I just thought the poll would be of interest.
 
Slightly worse due to the little bit of time they would have gained in the TTT. Wiggo would not have made Froome lose any time in the mountains. If anything Froome may have been more determined to push the pace when Wiggo struggled, So from a perspective over time gained/lost its a slight loss.
 
Froome will do much better without Wiggums on his back.

wiggins_calme_les_ardeurs_de_froome.jpg
 
Aug 16, 2011
10,819
2
0
Visit site
Much much better. Wiggins wouldn't have helped Froome I don't think, not on the flats or the mountains. The only benefit Wiggins would provide would have been help in the TTT. And for the rest of the race he would fill the role Cavendish played last year. Can win a couple stages himself but not much help for winning the overall.

And of course this way Froome can rest easier knowing he is definitely the leader and that no one is going to be trying to take that title away from him. That's another benefit of Wiggins not competing.
 
Jul 29, 2012
11,703
4
0
Visit site
I would say better for Froome. I don't think he was mentally ready for all the drama that definitely would have been there.

After Ax 3 drama would be over but i can weigh.

Still they are some advantages to having Wiggo there:

-The TTT of course, without Wiggo that's at least losing 10 sec.

-Sky could go tactical by sending him outfront orso (like uran in giro), i doubt they would do that though.

-And Wiggins can be a good domestique, i'm not sure if he would have done it but if so obviously an advantage.
 
Better because it is now clear: Froome is THE leader. No chance for a repeat of 1986. Too bad :rolleyes:

I agree with another post: Wiggins would be of limited assistance when it comes to setting the pace in the mountains.

Worse in the TTT. And in the flat stages: stages like the two in northern Brittany (10 and 11) are going to be very windy. Watch for the bordure! If Froome gets in trouble, he'll regret not having Wiggins to pull him back.

Although in that scenario, Wiggins could be in the lead pack, decide to pick up the pace and bury Froome once and for all :cool:

Too bad: it could have been twice as good as 1986 now that the riders have to climb l'Alpe D'Huez twice in a day. Hand in hand: hugs and kisses. Beatles' music in the background. Froomie to you. ;)
 
Sep 20, 2011
73
0
0
Visit site
Slightly worse, I guess. Even though they won a little time against Saxo-Tinkoff in the Tirreno-Adriatico TTT without Wiggins, I don't think they will be able to do the same thing in the Tour TTT
 
icefire said:
Less entertaining. And that's all I care.

Wiggins is, and has never been, an entertaining grand tour rider.

He is boring, methodical, and has one speed in the mountains. He's the type of rider that if he doesn't have a train setting the pace, he's done for.

The only thing that his presence in the Tour would have guaranteed was a war of words over team leadership. No one needs that kind of rubbish, and it has nothing to do with the actual race.

Wiggo could have handled this with more grace. I believe his heart was never into the Giro, so all he did was waste his time when he went to Italy. The Giro is a great race in it's own right, and deserved more of an effort from Sir Bradley.

Having said that, it's disappointing that the current Tour winner was not given an opportunity to defend his title. That to me also seems rubbish, but Brailsford made the decision and Wiggo should have stuck with it.