Have your attitude towards Froome changed after the Tour?

[airstream]

It wasn't sensational. In fact it was the very opposite of it - predictable. That's why I didn't enjoy it. There is no surprise anymore in Froome's abilities, but the fact that he turns up and wrecks the whole field at every race he turns up at, makes them boring to watch, so the best races are ones where they're not there or where they're somehow disadvantaged early on. Just like Michael Schumacher or Marit Bjørgen.

How do you follow so many sports than if they are full of Froomes? Lol, give dude some slack (or how do you say this...). it was just one season.

 

[Miburo]

It seems Airstream hasn't changed

I don't get the poll though, what did he do in or after the tour that could have changed my opinion?

We all know he could win the tour, well dominate. Did he do something that I missed or what?

Wtf happened with this forum btw? Was it really cause of Froome? What are the theories? lol

 

[Libertine Seguros]

How do you follow so many sports than if they are full of Froomes? Lol, give dude some slack (or how do you say this...). it was just one season.

He's been doing it for two years now though, it's just that this season he's been let off the leash. His ludicrous strength was funny for about five seconds before it got old fast. Is he more entertaining than Wiggins? Probably. But when you know one guy is so much stronger than the rest of the field, those attacks are less meaningful, because it's a case of when not if. If he's still more entertaining than Wiggins, I don't know. I have watched a grand total of one day of racing with Chris Froome in it this year. There's no point in watching something when you already know what's going to happen, and how it took place.

I was never that enthralled by Contador either, and I spent most of the 2011 season after mid-April hoping Gilbert would get beaten too. But at least with them there was the feeling that they COULD mess it up, in the former case because he's famously done it before and in the latter case because one day racing is generally less immediately predictable than stage racing. With Froome, you're just waiting for him to sleepwalk away from the field like he's just picked up a star in MarioKart. And since I find him utterly unbelievable, dislike his team and almost everything they stand for, and derive no pleasure from watching a walkover, I'm just waiting for somebody to pick up a blue shell.

As I've said before on the boards, my ideal sportspeople are successful and dynamic, but flawed. In biathlon, for example, my favourites have always been the super-fast skiers who are unreliable with the rifle. They blitz through the field, light up the competition... then arrive at the range and there is ALWAYS tension, because you never know when they're going to miss all 5. People like Uschi Disl and Frode Andresen are a bit before my time, but Lars Berger and Miriam Gössner fit the template. In motor racing, I always found the calculating, clever drivers like Alain Prost or Michael Schumacher to be a bit dull. I preferred less successful but more dynamic drivers like Jean Alesi or Juan Pablo Montoya; they had all the skill, but you knew they were just one mental lapse away from totally throwing everything away. I think that unlike, say, Schumacher, Sebastian Vettel comes across as a nice, personable guy, a lot like Froome. But I have little interest in watching him race at present. Cycling is no different. There's no tension with Chris Froome like there is with, say, Joaquím Rodríguez, when every time he gets the aero helmet and TT bike out you have to watch through your fingers and just pray he doesn't lose too much, or with, say, Igor Antón, where even when he's crushing the whole field you have to leave the room when the road starts going downhill through fear.

 

[airstream]

It seems Airstream hasn't changed

I don't get the poll though, what did he do in or after the tour that could have changed my opinion?

We all know he could win the tour, well dominate. Did he do something that I missed or what?

Wtf happened with this forum btw? Was it really cause of Froome? What are the theories? lol

As to you? Nothing. You could have changed ur opinion for the better only if Contador could have beat Froome harshly. Nonetheless the poll shows most people don't care about show and spectacle despite Froome provided it to the full.

 

[Climeon]

tour was boring, predictable race.

The thing is, in this tour there was lots of suspense and drama, be it in stage 9 when SKY were extremely weak and you wondered if they could survive the stage and the rest of the race against team tactics, the crosswinds stage where we saw a completely unexpected attack and the impression that SKY were vulnerable was enforced, Ventoux when we saw Froome attack Quintana several times on Ventoux but Quintana miraculously responded until 1.5km and you wondered if he could win the stage, the Alpe Deuz stage where Froome was dropped and Rodriquez emerged as a strong contender for the podium, the Semmnoz stage where you were constantly wondering if Quintana could beat Froome up until the point he countered Froome's attack and then flew away from him.

There were also many other excellent moments, such as Riblon's Alpe Deuz win where it seemed ever since the first ascent of Alpe Deuz that Van Garderen of Froome would win, but ultimately Riblon did and the constantly evolving battle for second. As well as this we saw the emergence of Quintana as one of the two best climbers in the world and many other fantastic completely unexpected things.

If Froome had been as dominant as he was on Ax-3 Domaines then it would have been a very boring race, but he wasn't. Instead, he attacked the race, attacking at the bottom of climbs for the fun of it but instead of going away, was reeled in and dropped by his competitors. Froome's, Quintana's and Contador's attacking racing helped ensure significant things happened on every climb and in this tour there was suspense throughout. Admittedly, after Ventoux the yellow Jersey looked completely sown up but there were so many other exciting things in the race such as whether Quintana could drop Froome, who would be second and third, the KOM, the hotly contested sprints and which breakaway rider would win various stages.

The intrigue of a tour is always inhibited if it has a dominant rider, but this was still a great tour which Froome fortunately didn’t dominate in the fashion it seemed he would after Aix Domaines and was instead dropped in the last two mountain stages by Quintana.

 

[Afrank]

As to you? Nothing. You could have changed ur opinion for the better only if Contador could have beat Froome harshly. Nonetheless the poll shows most people don't care about show and spectacle despite Froome provided it to the full.

I don't see how it shows that. I think it more shows that Froomes performances was, as Libertine pointed out, entirely expected. People knew Froome would ride away, people knew he would win with a big margin. And because they knew that, they didn't feel impressed when he did. And thus, their opinions of him remained the same.

When you pretty much know someone will win in the way Froome did, it does take some of the spectacle out of it. After Venoux, I remember myself hoping Froome didn't decide to go ahead and win all the remaining MTF stages, as it would get very old, very fast.

 

[sittingbison]

...<snipped out the drivel>....Froome's win was absolutely predictable. To me, it was something most of people could bet on in july of 2012 yet.

there you go, fixed. Who said you had problem with the lingo