Le Tour winner, Wiggins or Froome?

[blackcat]

put me down for Froome

 

[BillytheKid]

It's clear Froome needs to move on (I have know idea what his contract commits him to) and could contend this year, but I went with Wiggins becuase I still believe he will could be the best in the final ITT by a minute over Froome. If your hired to ride for a leader and that leader is doing an exceptional job, then I think you should honor your words.

I think poorly of disloyalty.

 

[El Pistolero]

I think poorly of cowardice.

 

[BillytheKid]

I selected Froome as there was no choice for Nibali! Go Vincenzo

There's still hope for Nibali, the Pyrenees loom....

 

[BillytheKid]

I think poorly of cowardice.

I think poorly of muckrakers....

 

[Nocontest]

I think poorly of muckrakers....

Agreed, El Pisto's comment was pretty silly. A guy is paid to do a job and he should do it. If Wiggo weren't leading by 3+ minutes it would be worth discussing but to say he is weak is just braindead stuff.

"hey Froomy we are concerned Brad is only winning by over three minutes so we want you to take over the team leadership so feel free to attack him anytime you get the chance"...and if you don't, you are a coward.

 

[Danilot]

Most people here seem to forget that Froome is an explosive climber whereas Wiggins is more of a diesel.

Even if Froome is given carte blanche, the most likely scenario is that he quickly opens a 25-second gap with his explosive attack, then he plateaus, and Wiggins eventually gets back to him by riding a strong, constant tempo.

After all, that's what happened virtually every single time Froome attacked Cobo in the last Vuelta.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIRIAinJo0E

Sorry for all Wiggins haterz out there, but you can't say that Rider A is better than Rider B based on a five-second attack.

 

[El Pistolero]

Agreed, El Pisto's comment was pretty silly. A guy is paid to do a job and he should do it. If Wiggo weren't leading by 3+ minutes it would be worth discussing but to say he is weak is just braindead stuff.

"hey Froomy we are concerned Brad is only winning by over three minutes so we want you to take over the team leadership so feel free to attack him anytime you get the chance"...and if you don't, you are a coward.

Trust me, who ever doesn't take the opportunity to win a Vuelta and Tour title because he's loyal to someone weaker is a coward.

 

[Bernie's eyesore]

Most people here seem to forget that Froome is an explosive climber whereas Wiggins is more of a diesel.

Even if Froome is given carte blanche, the most likely scenario is that he quickly opens a 25-second gap with his explosive attack, then he plateaus, and Wiggins eventually gets back to him by riding a strong, constant tempo.

After all, that's what happened virtually every single time Froome attacked Cobo in the last Vuelta.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIRIAinJo0E

Sorry for all Wiggins haterz out there, but you can't say that Rider A is better than Rider B based on a five-second attack.

Well said, Wiggins has consistently looked stronger than Froome apart from on the mountain top finishes. If Froome hadn't had that puncture it would have been an interesting battle but as things stand there is no reason to think Froome could make that time gap up.

 

[El Pistolero]

Wiggins has only looked stronger in one time trial, and not by much.

 

[Bernie's eyesore]

Wiggins has only looked stronger in one time trial, and not by much.

Stronger today, both at the finish and on Mont St Clair. Stronger on stage 8 when Froome didn't have the strength to close down Cadel's attack so Wiggo took over and did so with ease, stronger in the prologue. Just three examples you missed.

 

[El Pistolero]

Stronger today? How'd you know? Froome wisely did nothing today as there was nothing to gain.

 

[Angliru]

Stronger today, both at the finish and on Mont St Clair. Stronger on stage 8 when Froome didn't have the strength to close down Cadel's attack so Wiggo took over and did so with ease, stronger in the prologue. Just three examples you missed.

You seem to be forgetting the amount of time Froome spends with his nose in the wind for Wiggins. Wiggins should be stronger at the finish since that is the general idea of protecting the ride leader.

 

[The Joker]

I voted Wiggo - purely because of the sideburns

And we will probably never know who was stronger at this race between the 2 of them, since neither has had to do any attacking (other than small attacks at the end of stages, which suit Froome who is more explosive), and I cant see this changing for the rest of the tour with the way the GC stands.

Who knows - if Froome was allowed to attack 10km from the finish of Stage 17, he might initially put a minute into Wiggins, who might then TT for the next 8km, re-catch Froome and then go away and win by 30secs on the line. We will never know, because it wont happen at this race. Why bother to launch an attack which could cause you to blow up and lose serious time (as happended to Cadel Evans the other day), if you are 1 and 2 on GC and with another long TT to come.

Say what you will about Team Sky, but they are clearly not stupid!

 

[BigPhil3]

I'm surprised. EBH looked much stronger at the end of the stage today than Wiggo. Heck, EBH even passed Wiggo in the last 300 meters or so. Why isn't he the team leader now?

 

[King Of The Wolds]

It's really quite simple. Sky stand a better chance of winning the yellow jersey if Froome supports Brad, than they do if Froome gets carte blanche to attack whenever he wants. They know it, Sky's management know it and we all know it.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Froome.

http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme-sur-route/Actualites/Froome-c-est-difficile/298726

 

[Richeypen]

I'm surprised. EBH looked much stronger at the end of the stage today than Wiggo. Heck, EBH even passed Wiggo in the last 300 meters or so. Why isn't he the team leader now?

Depressingly 'The Guardian' actually reported this!

 

[mscaviy2601]

Depressingly 'The Guardian' actually reported this!

The Beeb suggested that Wiggins made a bid to win the stage. I'm not sure the British media or public will ever get their heads round the strategic elements of road racing no matter the success of Wiggins, Froome, Cavendish or Sky. British sport in general doesn't have that strategic element apart from cricket. It's why, although a Brit, I prefer American sports and now cycling - they require more thought than the more passive-only interaction of watching football or rugby.

 

[SuperH-]

The Beeb suggested that Wiggins made a bid to win the stage. I'm not sure the British media or public will ever get their heads round the strategic elements of road racing no matter the success of Wiggins, Froome, Cavendish or Sky. British sport in general doesn't have that strategic element apart from cricket. It's why, although a Brit, I prefer American sports and now cycling - they require more thought than the more passive-only interaction of watching football or rugby.

lol? football and rugby dont have strategies? somebody please take the time to explain this guy ;D

 

[mscaviy2601]

lol? football and rugby dont have strategies? somebody please take the time to explain this guy ;D

They might want to take the time to explain this incoherence first, unless you are really wanting someone to explain me. Football and rugby are tactical games rather than strategic (unless you take squad management into account). There's no equivalent to pitcher rotation in Baseball, the strategic elements of stage racing in cycling or the complex game planning of American Football.

From Wikipedia:

The terms tactic and strategy are often confused: tactics are the actual means used to gain an objective, while strategy is the overall campaign plan, which may involve complex operational patterns, activity, and decision-making that lead to tactical execution.

 

[Bernie's eyesore]

They might want to take the time to explain this incoherence first, unless you are really wanting someone to explain me. Football and rugby are tactical games rather than strategic (unless you take squad management into account). There's no equivalent to pitcher rotation in Baseball, the strategic elements of stage racing in cycling or the complex game planning of American Football.

From Wikipedia:

Baseball is rounders with an overarm delivery. It is the simplest sport known to man.

 

[mscaviy2601]

Baseball is rounders with an overarm delivery. It is the simplest sport known to man.

Really. If the count is 3-2, should a pitcher throw high and tight or low and away? If during a three game series against an opposing team you are scheduled to face mainly left handed pitchers, how should you build your batting roster? What's an ERA? What's "moneyball"?

Baseball is one of the most complex sports played today when one understands the intricacies. Saying Baseball is simple is like a non-cycling fan trying to understand why Andy Schleck isn't going all out to win a sprint stage or why Cadel Evans shouldn't go on a 100 KM breakaway to try and get back the time in the GC on today's stage.

 

[Offtheback]

Poursuivant is right. Let Wiggo make a mockery of the sport this year, Froome can carry on after he's done.

Absolutely hilarious stuff with the wives battling it out on twitter and all. Still waiting for the beetroot juice and perfectly aged tubular tires for this year, though. Probably something to do with riding like a scooter, since Twiggo is a mod.

Not on topic: but what have you got on Wiggins being a Mod? I thought Mods were now a small retro-following group in the UK, rather than a popular fashion trend. (He has the sideburns, but they are a bit scruffy for a Mod? Just interested).

 

[piemonster]

Froome.

http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme-sur-route/Actualites/Froome-c-est-difficile/298726

SBS on the same story I think

http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/news/37888/froome-expects-wiggins-to-return-loyalty-in-2013