Which, in and of itself is fine.
But the reason to pick that video is because it is literally the only memorable thing Froome had done until stage 9 of the 2011 Vuelta. That day was impressive. There were people (I was among them, one of even the leaders of the group) who believed that Froome was peaking for week 2 there and Löfkvist would take over as domestique of choice for Wiggins in week 3, and so Froome would soft-pedal the ITT and lose several minutes to be fresh for Wiggins.
There were a few moments of vague promise in Froome's 2008 and early 2009. Nothing remotely special, but signs that the guy could be a decent top level rider. In the wake of his Vuelta show, people were rewriting history to say that his being in the break over Croix de Fer and in the heads of state group at the bottom of Alpe d'Huez in 2008 showed that he had the talent to compete for the win at GTs. No it didn't. It was a pretty impressive show for an effective neo-pro in his first GT to have the strength to be in the break at that point. But Johan van Summeren was in that group too - it wasn't like it was élite climbers only. You know who had a more impressive showing in a GT a year later at a young age? Rigoberto Urán. He was everywhere in key moves in week 3. And Ignatas Konovalovas, winning that ITT at the end of the 2009 Giro. You know, the race where Froome performed his only memorable feat until September 2011: pulling a Taaramäe before even Taaramäe got to pull one.
If you look at Froome's career from début to May 2009, then from August 2011 to present, you could perhaps believe the progression. Even then, it'd be a little bit surprising, as other riders have shown more impressively in GTs at a young age, and you would expect them to still be above Froome. But it wouldn't be ridiculous. Unfortunately, I can't unsee May 2009 to August 2011, where he showed little improvement, did nothing of note and was close to losing his contract.
If Sky knew they had a potential British GT winner (and let's face it, even at the start of that Vuelta after showing great form in March and June, we still had no idea whether Wiggins would turn out to be that) on the roster, do you think they'd have let his contract run out? Re-signing him only AFTER that Vuelta only wound up costing them a bunch of money they wouldn't have had to spend if they'd only re-signed their potential GT winner while he was still a nobody, right? They were very quick to say that Froome had always had the 'numbers' to be a GT talent, but if that was the case, how come he'd not benefited at all from Sky's marginal gains at all until that point? The bilharzia (and its convenient relapse excusing him for sucking all year until TdF prep in 2012) accounts for some of that, sure, but he maintained that he caught it at the end of 2010... so there's a big gap from his planting it on San Luca to the end of the 2010 season where he made no progression despite having these mysterious 'numbers' that were never mentioned until he started making the likes of Nibali and Rodríguez look like chumps on climbs, whilst in a team committed to developing British riders, that we can't account for.
By most accounts, Chris Froome is a nice guy. He's an affable interview, self-deprecating at times. But he's also the possessor of one of the most suspicious transformations in modern cycling history.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram