I never mentioned plausibility did I? Just what's good for the sport, in the short term at least....much like Lance was good for the sport in the short termKoronin said:brownbobby said:Well if you share the view of some that all TDF winners are doped to the gills, then the Eurosport commentators are right....JA winning will be great for the Tour and thus great for the sport in general.therealthing said:Sickening the hear the Eurosport commentators saying how Alaphilippe winning would be 'great for cycling.'
To have a classics rider suddenly turning into a monster time trialist and dropping established climbers on huge climbs would be a total farce for cycling and a slap in the face for fans.
Far better this than the processions and neutralised racing of the past 8 years which have caused large swathes of the French public to disengage with the Tour, and worse still spread a toxic atmosphere along the roadside in recent tours.
Without wanting to go down the rabbit hole of nationalistic bias, a French winner, even more so one with the style of Allaphillipe, can only be a good thing for the sport......until he gets caught of course, but i'm for enjoying the show whilst its good
If we were talking about Pinot I'd agree. We're talking about Alaphilippe. A rider who has NEVER once shown this kind of climbing abilities and now all of a sudden (and yes overnight) he can drop the best climbers in the world. Nope, sorry, that just doesn't work. Alaphilippe winning would be about the worst thing that can happen to cyclist. Not only will you get doping, but also major favoritism accusations.
Of course those of us who frequent this and similar forums have different thresholds when it comes to what's plausible....but I maintain that JA winning the tour would be great for cycling in the short term, and who knows how long that lasts or how widespread the pisitive boost, but dont confuse the cynicism of the forums with the 'see no evil' enthusiasm of the casual fan
I do agree though that Pinot would be an even better winner