Wiggins Discussion thread.

[hrotha]

If its "Sir Wiggins".... does he have to ride with armor and a Lance?
.

The Lance won't be a problem. Wiggins loves him some Lance.

 

[Apollonius]

Brailsford will be knighted, and deservedly so.

Wiggins should not be knighted until he retires, and I'd be surprised if he is knighted sooner.

Gordon Brown bent the rules by knighting Chris Hoy for his own political reasons ... partly to associate himself with the post-Olympic feelgood factor, but mostly to stick it to the Scottish National Party by knighting a Scottish Unionist for his contribution to a British victory.

Yeah - knighting Hoy was massively political and very wrong IMO.

I'd imagine they'll wait to till Wiggins is very much retired before any knighthood, just in case of any clinic reasons (not for a moment suggesting he'd be involved in that, just that this is cycling and it's a problem people are wary of being embarrassed about).
He is certainly more deserving then HOY.

A Knighthood for Brailsford will no doubt be Knighted in the next honours list, he'll be one of the few worthy nominees across the boards.

 

[King Of The Wolds]

We saw the best time trialist. Congratulations to him.

The Tour route left much to be desired.

As far as growing up is concerned: when somebody mature enough around here has anything to actually debate about what I critically said, not just about SKY, but today's cycling in general, I'm all ears. But then again I realize most are clinging to their puerile motives.

Final analysis, a great time trialist won a boring Tour. Hopefully next year's course presents us with an attacker's race, in which case Wiggins will have to excel himself.

Post Scriptum: Saw a clip of Chiappucci's famous win at Sestriere 92: 5 cols, the Iseren (the roof of Europe), Sestriere, 7 hours 45 minutes winning time. Now that's a course worthy of the Tour. Keep the long time trials, but give us real mountain stages too. And by the way, Indurain, the super time trialist, won that Tour.

Two things.

There's still this myth that Wiggins can't handle the long, multiple HC climb stages, deep into a 3rd week. This Tour has completely disproved that notion. There's been nothing to suggest that he and his team would struggle on that 92 stage. I get the impression that he and Froome would have just won by even more, if we'd have a had a stage or two like that.

Secondly, that 92 parcours had over 200km of TTing. That was the norm. Wiggins would be a multiple TdF champ on this form, with parcours like those.

Final analysis is that the 2nd best climber and by far the best TTer won the Tour. To be able to combine those 2 facets to such an extent is worthy of the highest praise.

No doubt about it, Brad's had a phenomenal year and his name deservedly sits alongside the likes of Indurain, Lemond and Contador.

 

[blackcat]

so why did he wait til now to exploit the riches on the continent of this manifest talent.

If money is any incentive, either Wiggins is a fool, or a commie

actually, could be both

 

[Machu Picchu]

Probably the most stupid post I have ever seen on here, Wiggins beat Nibali by 6 minutes and 19 seconds for Christ's sake. I still haven't stopped laughing!

I can see that you are slow witted and easily amused and so things would need to be explained as you would to a child.

btw, if you wish to troll you should take lessons from this guy:

No doubt about it, Brad's had a phenomenal year and his name deservedly sits alongside the likes of Indurain, Lemond and Contador.

That's some real trolling

 

[lanternrouge]

btw, if you wish to troll you should take lessons from this guy:



That's some real trolling

You should know. Whilst Brad will never go down as one of the greats name another rider than won P-N, Romandie, the Dauphine and the Tour in a season? The man deserves some respect.

You can all whine all you want about Froome, parcours, missing riders or any other bull**** you want but the fact is he has won far and square. Riders make the race not the route.

How do you like them apples!

 

[Magnus]

Post Scriptum: Saw a clip of Chiappucci's famous win at Sestriere 92: 5 cols, the Iseren (the roof of Europe), Sestriere, 7 hours 45 minutes winning time. Now that's a course worthy of the Tour. Keep the long time trials, but give us real mountain stages too. And by the way, Indurain, the super time trialist, won that Tour.

I'm sure that if that particular stage was included somebody would be moaning that nobody would attack because of the 35 km valley before the Sestriere climb and that the climb itself is way to easy with only a 5.9% avg gradient.

If Prudhomme had presented the route of '92, this Forum would break down with complaints about only two mountainstages, a total of 137 km itt and a 63.5 km ttt.

 

[Poursuivant]

I'm sure that if that particular stage was included somebody would be moaning that nobody would attack because of the 35 km valley before the Sestriere climb and that the climb itself is way to easy with only a 5.9% avg gradient.

If Prudhomme had presented the route of '92, this Forum would break down with complaints about only two mountainstages, a total of 137 km itt and a 63.5 km ttt.

Lol, so true.

Respect to Wiggins, an absolute powerhouse today, pleased for him.

 

[rhubroma]

Two things.

There's still this myth that Wiggins can't handle the long, multiple HC climb stages, deep into a 3rd week. This Tour has completely disproved that notion. There's been nothing to suggest that he and his team would struggle on that 92 stage. I get the impression that he and Froome would have just won by even more, if we'd have a had a stage or two like that.

Secondly, that 92 parcours had over 200km of TTing. That was the norm. Wiggins would be a multiple TdF champ on this form, with parcours like those.

Final analysis is that the 2nd best climber and by far the best TTer won the Tour. To be able to combine those 2 facets to such an extent is worthy of the highest praise.

No doubt about it, Brad's had a phenomenal year and his name deservedly sits alongside the likes of Indurain, Lemond and Contador.

In fact, many TT miles was the norm. Though what this Tour lacked was precisely one stage like that. Although with this year's competition that may have mattered little. Let's see next year when Contador and Schleck are back, and Froome can ride for himself.

 

[Bernie's eyesore]

I can see that you are slow witted and easily amused and so things would need to be explained as you would to a child.

btw, if you wish to troll you should take lessons from this guy:



That's some real trolling

With the greatest respect, anyone who believes Nibali would have been 6 minutes 20 seconds better off if Wiggins had not had such a strong team behind him is not worthy of any respect. Of course, the team was a big help but Wiggins was much stronger than everyone in this race bar Froome and would have won by a wide margin regardless. If you think that believing that is 'trolling' then you are entitled to your opinion. I get that you hate the bloke and it is hurting you that he won so easily and I apologise on Wiggo's behalf for any upset he has caused you.

 

[rhubroma]

I'm sure that if that particular stage was included somebody would be moaning that nobody would attack because of the 35 km valley before the Sestriere climb and that the climb itself is way to easy with only a 5.9% avg gradient.

If Prudhomme had presented the route of '92, this Forum would break down with complaints about only two mountainstages, a total of 137 km itt and a 63.5 km ttt.

I was referring to the fact that this Tour lacked such a stage, not that the 92 Tour hadn't more of them. That one stage was better than all the hills in this Tour combined. But this is too inconvenient to your goal.

Subtleties are at times merely intentionally mystifying and obfuscating, as you of all people should well know.

 

[King Of The Wolds]

Schleck.

By the time of the next Tour, it will be 3 years since Andy has really taken it to the Tour's GC men, one stage excepted last year when it was a case of too little, too lat. He's seemed disinterested and demotivated recently. And his soul mate will be gone. His team too, maybe. All I see there, at the moment, is the talent.

 

[rhubroma]

By the time of the next Tour, it will be 3 years since Andy has really taken it to the Tour's GC men, one stage excepted last year when it was a case of too little, too lat. He's seemed disinterested and demotivated recently. And his soul mate will be gone. His team too, maybe. All I see there, at the moment, is the talent.

Leave out Shleck, if you must. Contador, with his violent accelerations, will be a beast to deal with in the mountains, if the sport is still on two legs.

 

[BillytheKid]

You should know. Whilst Brad will never go down as one of the greats name another rider than won P-N, Romandie, the Dauphine and the Tour in a season? The man deserves some respect.

You can all whine all you want about Froome, parcours, missing riders or any other bull**** you want but the fact is he has won far and square. Riders make the race not the route.

How do you like them apples!

+1 great post. Wiggins left no doubts today. Froome owes a lot to Sky, including a chance at his own team. This was the year for Wigggins.

 

[Magnus]

I was referring to the fact that this Tour lacked such a stage,

Yeah, I understood that. But frankly stage 17 of this years TdF is way better suited to long range attacks than the Sestriere stage in '92.

Take the Sestriere stage:
After the descent from Iseran you've got 15 km in the valley before the ascent to Mont Cenis. After the ascent there is 5 km of more or less flat before you start the descent to Susa. From Susa you've got 35 in the valley before you reach Cesana and start the ascent to Sestriere. The climb to Sestriere is 11.5 km @5.9%.

Take stage 17 of this year's TdF:
After the descent from Tourmalet you get straight to the ascent to Col d'Aspin. Of course the first part of the Aspin ascent is not very steep, but at least you're riding in the forest and isn't exposed to wind as you are in the valley between Iseran and Mont Cenis. After the ascent you go straight to the descent. After the descent you have 10 km to the beginning of the ascent to Col de Peyresourde which is 9.5 km @6.7%

 

[Froome19]

Well lets see...
Giro d'italia 2011
1. Alberto Contador Velasco (Spain), SaxoBank-Sungard, 84:05:14
2. Michele Scarponi (Italy), Lampre-ISD, at 6:10
3. Vincenzo Nibali (Italy), Liquigas-Cannondale, at 6:56

Tour de France 2012
1 Bradley Wiggins (GBr) Sky Procycling 84:26:31
3 Vincenzo Nibali (Ita) Liquigas-Cannondale 0:06:19

Close enough for me

 

[gthx_gthx_]

Well lets see...
Giro d'italia 2011
1. Alberto Contador Velasco (Spain), SaxoBank-Sungard, 84:05:14
2. Michele Scarponi (Italy), Lampre-ISD, at 6:10
3. Vincenzo Nibali (Italy), Liquigas-Cannondale, at 6:56

Tour de France 2012
1 Bradley Wiggins (GBr) Sky Procycling 84:26:31
3 Vincenzo Nibali (Ita) Liquigas-Cannondale 0:06:19

Close enough for me

I think if Contador really wanted to go full gas on every stage he would have put more that 7 min on Nibali. And it is harder to put 7 min to Nibali almost only on moutain stages that putting 7 min to him in ITT mostly

But I don't really think that such comparison give us a lot of information.
For exemple Giro 2011 was filled with crazy mountain stages and 1 ITT ? whereas Tour was mostly filled with far less hard mountain stages and way more ITT. So it's hard to conclude anything.

 

[Froome19]

I think if Contador really wanted to go full gas on every stage he would have put more that 7 min on Nibali. And it is harder to put 7 min to Nibali almost only on moutain stages that putting 7 min to him in ITT mostly

But I don't really think that such comparison give us a lot of information.
For exemple Giro 2011 was filled with crazy mountain stages and 1 ITT ? whereas Tour was mostly filled with far less hard mountain stages and way more ITT. So it's hard to conclude anything.

Indeed correct but that is beside the point because Wiggins's specialty is in the TT and Contador's was in the mountains.

 

[gthx_gthx_]

Indeed correct but that is beside the point because Wiggins's specialty is in the TT and Contador's was in the mountains.

You're right , it would make a battle between Wiggins and Contador all the more interesting.

 

[The Hitch]

Well lets see...
Giro d'italia 2011
1. Alberto Contador Velasco (Spain), SaxoBank-Sungard, 84:05:14
2. Michele Scarponi (Italy), Lampre-ISD, at 6:10
3. Vincenzo Nibali (Italy), Liquigas-Cannondale, at 6:56

Tour de France 2012
1 Bradley Wiggins (GBr) Sky Procycling 84:26:31
3 Vincenzo Nibali (Ita) Liquigas-Cannondale 0:06:19

Close enough for me

Wiggins might even win this pointless comparison once we consider how many bonus seconds Contador got on 1 stage win and 4 stage podiums compared to Nibalis 1 or 2 podiums.

What the results table from wikipedia doesn't tell however is the way in which Contador took it easy aside from Etna and Glossglockner, not using the mountains almost at all other than to on occasion fly away in the final few km or even m of a stage.

Oh and here is another comparison

Rank Rider Team Time
1. CONTADOR VELASCO Alberto AST 85h48'35"
2. SCHLECK Andy SAX 04'11"
3. ARMSTRONG Lance AST 05'24"
4. WIGGINS Bradley GRM 06'01"
5. SCHLECK Fränk SAX 06'04"
6. KLÖDEN Andreas AST 06'42"
7. NIBALI Vincenzo LIQ 07'35"

 

[Froome19]

Wiggins might even win this pointless comparison once we consider how many bonus seconds Contador got on 1 stage win and 4 stage podiums compared to Nibalis 1 or 2 podiums.

What the results table from wikipedia doesn't tell however is the way in which Contador took it easy aside from Etna and Glossglockner, not using the mountains almost at all other than to on occasion fly away in the final few km or even m of a stage.

Oh and here is another comparison

Rank Rider Team Time CQ
1. CONTADOR VELASCO Alberto AST 85h48'35"
2. SCHLECK Andy SAX 04'11"
3. ARMSTRONG Lance AST 05'24"
4. WIGGINS Bradley GRM 06'01"
5. SCHLECK Fränk SAX 06'04"
6. KLÖDEN Andreas AST 06'42"
7. NIBALI Vincenzo LIQ 07'35"

The last comparison is irrelevant unless you think Wiggins has not really improved since 2009....

And likewise of course there are hundreds of variables but I think it is obvious that Nibali was markedly better in this year's Tour than last year's Giro, you may disagree but I guess it is just a matter of opinion.

And using raw facts is certainly not ideal but they do give a fair enough idea of where things are at.

 

[The Hitch]

The last comparison is irrelevant unless you think Wiggins has not really improved since 2009....
.

What has Wiggins got to do with it? You show Wiggins beating Nibali by 6, I show you Contador doing it by 7 wiggins or no wiggins.

And using raw facts is certainly not ideal but they do give a fair enough idea of where things are at

No they do not. the suggestion that Wiggins is anywhere near Contador in gts is ridiculous and can not be made true by a copying and pasting a couple of results from different races.

 

[Froome19]

What has Wiggins got to do with it? You show Wiggins beating Nibali by 6, I show you Contador doing it by 7 wiggins or no wiggins.

Ok then look at the rest of my post for the reason why that was irrelevant

No they do not. the suggestion that Wiggins is anywhere near Contador in gts is ridiculous and can not be made true by a copying and pasting a couple of results from different races.

I think it is fair to say the level of domination was at a similar level in terms of the race as a whole.

 

[Machu Picchu]

How do you like them apples!

Ok the comment which I took exception to was comparing wiggins to indurain (5 tours/2 giro/1 + 2 other podiums), contador (3 tours/2 giro/1 vuelta) and lemond (3 tours + 3 podiums), and you come back with paris-nice and dauphine?

I like my own apples just fine thanks.

 

[Machu Picchu]

With the greatest respect, anyone who believes Nibali would have been 6 minutes 20 seconds better off if Wiggins had not had such a strong team behind him is not worthy of any respect. Of course, the team was a big help but Wiggins was much stronger than everyone in this race bar Froome and would have won by a wide margin regardless. If you think that believing that is 'trolling' then you are entitled to your opinion. I get that you hate the bloke and it is hurting you that he won so easily and I apologise on Wiggo's behalf for any upset he has caused you.

Again your appear to be struggling to understand the basic premise that there is no 6 minutes 20 seconds, that was gained with his clinical team holding his hand up the climbs and is therefore moot. It was such idiocy that lead you to state that the tt somehow demonstrated that wiggins was stronger than froome (which, in a tt solely is obvious).

Thanks for the apology though it really isn't necessary, no hate for wiggins or his newly acquired fans.