dimspace said:
i just edited that fairly dramatically..
what results have you got for 2006, cos i cant find anything for that year..
oh i agree.. they wanted him for TT'ing and that suited him.. it benefit both sides pretty well..
Dimspace, I just reckon you fell for the talking point and soundbite, that Wiggo was a chrono rider par excellence, when his results never justified it. It was all on the back of the pursuit.
And a few riders, Phinney, Thomas, Bobridge, Sergent, are gonna blow his pb away. Even his pb in training. And Thomas and Bobridge will be lighter, and much lighter at Wiggo's pursuit weight, but lower than his Tour weight in 2009.
The pursuit was a weak field. Roulston left the track behind for years, had heart troubles, and picked up and went 4'16" in the Olympics. One year older than Wiggo. What would have Rolly done if Bike NZ had the resources of GB Cycling, and he rode the pursuit for 8 years. Hendo reckons the pursuit times can come way down with specialisation. He was a chrono champ and pursuit champ of NZ about a decade back. He was also second in the Catalunya prologue this year to Valverde.
Throw all these riders in the pursuit, with Wiggo's resources and specialization, and they threaten.
But none could have done, apart from these new young guys, what Wiggo did in the Tour this year. None.
Vandevelde was a 4'30" rider in 2000 Olympics, yeah, a fair way behind Hayles. But dare say, given the same resources and specialization, he comes way down. He probably was not even training indoors. Farrar, Renshaw, Boonen, Cancellara, all those guys, would be lower than Wiggo's mark imo.