King Of The Wolds said:
The reigning maillot jaune versus maglia rosa and you're still not happy. Guess there's no pleasing some people, unless a rider's name ends in ez or something.
Some people prefer the spectacle, some people prefer the talent level.
I'd rather watch an exciting free-for-all in the Tour of a small province of Bolivia than a tightly controlled ride in the Tour de France, but I am aware that it would mean far less and I would therefore find the Tour de France stage more tense and nerve-wracking, but that's more to do with how much is on the line and our investment in the personalities that duke it out than the race.
Wiggins vs. Hesjedal features two major protagonists, but it will, more than likely, be exciting through the value of the riders' palmarès only; neither are known as free-flowing, attacking cyclists who create those great stages where control completely breaks down. Most of us tend to value those stages where there is no control as the most exciting, because the range of potential outcomes is greater, and the period over which they develop is longer. Sky thrive on control. There's nothing wrong with that, after all, it's highly effective. However, it doesn't excite many fans who prefer a more unpredictable race. Therefore, a tense battle between them is not the equivalent of a chaotic 4-3 match between two big teams, it's a tense 1-0 between two giants. This has its place, but it doesn't necessarily make somebody wrong not to find it appealing. Hesjedal did attack a few times in the Giro and deserved the win just for that, because it was probably the most conservatively-raced Grand Tour ever.