2012 Tour De France Spolier Thread
Comments
-
Rick Chasey wrote:bompington wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:If Froome is stronger than Wiggins
He was yesterday.
He also was when he won the stage.
If we extrapolate from the Vuelta, he also does better as the race goes on.
We'll see, but me thinks he's the strongest man in the peloton right now.
Surely depends on the objective though. Wiggins is expecting support, Froome will be putting himself in the shop window for future tours, no? Not exactly slow and steady for Wiggins but he'll be doing what he needs to do rather than being a hero.
Edit: What CC said above.0 -
Could even be nearer 2 mins on the final, much flatter, TT.pitchshifter wrote:Lets also remember Wiggins is likely to put close to a minute into Froome on the TT.You only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.0 -
Daz555 wrote:
Could even be nearer 2 mins on the final, much flatter, TT.pitchshifter wrote:Lets also remember Wiggins is likely to put close to a minute into Froome on the TT.
Possibly.
Could be the other way too.
Take a look at the Vuelta TT.
http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/08/ ... -10_190419
I think Froome is better come week 3 too. Week 3 TTs are a different beast entirely.
Like I said, we'll see, but I reckon had they been on different teams, Froome would be pulling out more time in the mountains than he'd be losing in the TTs - judging by his performances so far.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:Daz555 wrote:
Could even be nearer 2 mins on the final, much flatter, TT.pitchshifter wrote:Lets also remember Wiggins is likely to put close to a minute into Froome on the TT.
Possibly.
Could be the other way too.
Take a look at the Vuelta TT.
http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/08/ ... -10_190419
I think Froome is better come week 3 too. Week 3 TTs are a different beast entirely.
Like I said, we'll see, but I reckon had they been on different teams, Froome would be pulling out more time in the mountains than he'd be losing in the TTs - judging by his performances so far.
I think the Vuelta is different, Wiggins didn't train for the Vuelta Froome did...
Edit: OT: Not taking Fuglsang to the tour was a shocker...0 -
Do we actually know that Froome is stronger? I agree he may be but isnt a big part of what we are seeing a stylistic difference? Wiggins doesn't have great acceleration but can churn out the watts at a high level on a sustained basis. I don't doubt that Froome could put some seconds into him on a lot of the uphill finishes but over the whole tour? I think that's far from proven.
In the end, it seems obvious that if Sky stick to plan A and Froome rides for Brad then Sky will collect the GC. Given that, changing from plan A would be deeply unprofessional. As others have said it would carry risk with no obvious upside for the TEAM. Brailsford has not built his career on that sort of idiocy.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:2009 Tour. Armstrong Contador.
2004 Giro. Simoni Cunego.
Any TdF with T mobile with Ulrich, Vino and Kloden on the same team.
1997 Tour. Ulrich Riis.
1986. LeMond -Hinault.
Etc etc.
It's rare, but it happens. It adds a whole dimension to the fight. Hotel tensions, who do the domestiques work for etc etc.
Lemond and Hinault was always run under team orders. in 1997, from memory, Riis blew up (or didn't have the right drugs). Ulrich was let off the lease once Riis had blown, not before.
Contador's a dick, and was ignoring team orders, not following them. Any fule kno that.
Who watches the Giro?
Your POV is completely understandable as a spectator wanting to be entertained. But it is incomprehensible as an armchair team manager. Using your two strongest riders to try to break each other is bonkers. It certainly isn't "hedging your bets".0 -
I think you need to take into account the whole team here, its not just Wiggins and Froome. on the Madeleine EBH and Knees sat on the front, followed by Rogers, Wiggins, Porte and Froome, on the Glandon/croix de Fer, it was the same again until they lost EBH and Knees, For the next two Cols Rogers and Porte took it on with Froome being sheltered until he was needed on La Toussuire.
Only Radioshack had any other guys at the front of the race and they couldn't handle it. Froome may well be a GT GC winner in the future, but i doubt it will be at another team as the other teams just aren't strong enough. I can see him going to the Giro next year with Uran, Porte and Heano and winning there.
This Tour is about Wiggins and although Froome appears strong, they wont move the goal posts."If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got."
PX Kaffenback 2 = Work Horse
B-Twin Alur 700 = Sundays and Hills0 -
Not liking the WAGs handbags on twitter. Froome looks strong, but also showed weakness on the climb yesterday. I also think people underestimate how much he benefits from having Wiggins tell him what to do! Will be interesting to see how he copes as a leader in his own right - He could do with an experienced head alongside to rein in his instinct to attack whenever he feels like it (fun though it is to watch).
As for super-domestiques, Froome is Indurain 1990 / Ullrich 1996 (both of whom could have won those tours in my opionion) - both did their job and waited their turn, that's just how these things go.0 -
When it looked for a moment as if Froome had cracked yesterday - the dreaded moto shot and caption as he disappeared out the back of the yellow jersey group spelling out his doom - I suddenly felt very sorry for him; that he'd sacrificed at the very least a podium shot for the team cause suddenly seemed very unfair. This is a team sport but at the end of the day it will be Wiggins who takes the glory and all the opportunities (financial and otherwise) that come with a Tour win. I was delighted then when he recovered. His "attack", however, seemed designed to unhitch Wiggins - it may have been a moment of madness or a misunderstanding but it looked at initial sight like an attack on Wiggins to me because Wiggo was the rider who had the least time to react (especially as he most of all wasn't expecting it) and when Pinot went with Froome (which given Pinot's strengths was always likely) that gapped Wiggo and put him under pressure. At that point my sympathy for Froome waned because it seemed like a cheap shot - if you really want to prove you're the stronger ride away from Wiggins don't jump him.0
-
I think my original point stands. It is Thursday, Froome is still up there. His riding style looks more lively than Wiggins, methodical approach* and this makes him appear stronger. So, it's Thursday and we are all discussing Froome.TailWindHome wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:
It wouldn't surprise me if Froome, who may still be up there by Thursday, starts thinking "If I go for this stage win...." If Bradley even hints at weakness it wouldn't surprise me if Froome spends a couple days in yellow (possibly in Paris).
Anyway....... :roll: .
You were also told what would happen.
Realistically, regardless of what he may want, Froome isn't going to attack Wiggins and his only oppurtunity to battle Nibali will come from supporting Wiggins and pulling Nibali back when he attacks. With the exception of the TT, he won't attack Nibali. It is unheard of for a domestique, albeit a super-duper one, to battle for second place with more than half a Tour to go and at the potential detriment of his team Leader losing first place. So he will support as per his job. If he went maverick I can see Brailsford pulling him from the Tour, Team GB - if it comes - or simply making his life hard/ostracising him. For this Tour at least, Froome has more to lose should he not follow orders.
All that said, I can see Froome being left disgruntled if his being forced to help Bradley means he sacrifices second place. But honestly there are a few domestiques who could place higher had they not had to help the team/carry the leader.
What is likely to happen is that after this Tour Froome, who will be strengthend if he finishes second or drops down the GC because he has had to help Wiggins, will meet with Brailsford and (i) ask for a contract improvement and/or (ii) ask to be given a shot at a Grand Tour or monument race.
*Honestly, Froome/Wiggins parrallel reminds me of the difference between Hearns and Hagler. Hagler was more methodical, traditional. Hearns was all energy and lively.
I also think the discussion of this Tour has been properly exciting. Far better than the Lance/Contador discussions when they both rode for Astana.
Whatever happens Froome's stock value has increased and if Sky aren't careful to appease him I reckon another big team trying to buy out his contract...Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
Greg66 wrote:Contador's a dick, and was ignoring team orders, not following them. Any fule kno that.
That's one interpretation.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
TailWindHome wrote:Greg66 wrote:Contador's a dick, and was ignoring team orders, not following them. Any fule kno that.
That's one interpretation.
First time I've heard it that way around I must say.0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:Honestly, Froome/Wiggins parrallel reminds me of the difference between Hearns and Hagler. Hagler was more methodical, traditional. Hearns was all energy and lively.
Well Hearns and Froome have a very similar leg circumference! Not so sure about the upper body!0 -
Greg66 wrote:[
Your POV is completely understandable as a spectator wanting to be entertained. But it is incomprehensible as an armchair team manager. Using your two strongest riders to try to break each other is bonkers. It certainly isn't "hedging your bets".
If they're both riding away from everyone, does it matter that they're fighting it out?0 -
Greg can't be more right if he tried. And trying to argue against it is just ridiculous.Rick Chasey wrote:Greg66 wrote:[
Your POV is completely understandable as a spectator wanting to be entertained. But it is incomprehensible as an armchair team manager. Using your two strongest riders to try to break each other is bonkers. It certainly isn't "hedging your bets".
If they're both riding away from everyone, does it matter that they're fighting it out?
Why would you inject additional risks when the overall goal is to win and the current tactics are doing just that.
Now you are just being silly, and I'm saying that so you can only imagine the level of silly that you are demonstrating right now!Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:
Greg can't be more right if he tried. And trying to argue against it is just ridiculous.Rick Chasey wrote:Greg66 wrote:[
Your POV is completely understandable as a spectator wanting to be entertained. But it is incomprehensible as an armchair team manager. Using your two strongest riders to try to break each other is bonkers. It certainly isn't "hedging your bets".
If they're both riding away from everyone, does it matter that they're fighting it out?
Why would you inject additional risks when the overall goal is to win and the current tactics are doing just that.
Now you are just being silly, and I'm saying that so you can only imagine the level of silly that you are demonstrating right now!
I think Rick is just on a low level wind up - he follows this sport pretty closely so knows what he's suggesting is not realistic.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:Greg66 wrote:[
Your POV is completely understandable as a spectator wanting to be entertained. But it is incomprehensible as an armchair team manager. Using your two strongest riders to try to break each other is bonkers. It certainly isn't "hedging your bets".
If they're both riding away from everyone, does it matter that they're fighting it out?
As a matter of interest, what do the chaps over in Pro Race think of your strategy?0 -
Greg66 wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Greg66 wrote:[
Your POV is completely understandable as a spectator wanting to be entertained. But it is incomprehensible as an armchair team manager. Using your two strongest riders to try to break each other is bonkers. It certainly isn't "hedging your bets".
If they're both riding away from everyone, does it matter that they're fighting it out?
As a matter of interest, what do the chaps over in Pro Race thing of your strategy?
Or Cathy Wiggins?
Hehe“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Go take a look.
No-one's really discussing it TBH.
I see it like this. Wiggins can keep up with Nibs. Might lose the odd second here and there on a finish on Nib's sprint.
Wiggins won't lose much in 3km, but it makes sense for Froome to gain some, so why not let him go for it?
He wouldn't have got yellow yet, but sky'd have been in a stronger position team wise. That gives them more options later on too.
If I were sky I'd be sending Froome up in late moves and have Wiggins follow wheels anyway. Either way that scenario turns out, Sky win.0 -
TailWindHome wrote:Greg66 wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Greg66 wrote:[
Your POV is completely understandable as a spectator wanting to be entertained. But it is incomprehensible as an armchair team manager. Using your two strongest riders to try to break each other is bonkers. It certainly isn't "hedging your bets".
If they're both riding away from everyone, does it matter that they're fighting it out?
As a matter of interest, what do the chaps over in Pro Race thing of your strategy?
Or Cathy Wiggins?
Hehe
I don't "tweet", but I've seen some references to WAGS tweeting. Can some helpful technophile summarise what's been going on for me?0 -
Greg66 wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Greg66 wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Greg66 wrote:[
Your POV is completely understandable as a spectator wanting to be entertained. But it is incomprehensible as an armchair team manager. Using your two strongest riders to try to break each other is bonkers. It certainly isn't "hedging your bets".
If they're both riding away from everyone, does it matter that they're fighting it out?
As a matter of interest, what do the chaps over in Pro Race thing of your strategy?
Or Cathy Wiggins?
Hehe
I don't "tweet", but I've seen some references to WAGS tweeting. Can some helpful technophile summarise what's been going on for me?
Cathy Wiggins made a dig at Froome, praising Porte and rogers for their 'professionlism' and obviously leaving Froome out. Froome's wife got involved. Peta Todd got involved.
And in all this, @RickChasey kept cropping up on Cathy Wiggin's feed. (well, twice or 3 times).
I may have said something. :twisted:0 -
RC is winding up Bradley Wiggins wife on twitter by the looks of it.
0 -
Greg66 wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:2009 Tour. Armstrong Contador.
2004 Giro. Simoni Cunego.
Any TdF with T mobile with Ulrich, Vino and Kloden on the same team.
1997 Tour. Ulrich Riis.
1986. LeMond -Hinault.
Etc etc.
It's rare, but it happens. It adds a whole dimension to the fight. Hotel tensions, who do the domestiques work for etc etc.
Lemond and Hinault was always run under team orders. in 1997, from memory, Riis blew up (or didn't have the right drugs). Ulrich was let off the lease once Riis had blown, not before.
Contador's a dick, and was ignoring team orders, not following them. Any fule kno that.
Who watches the Giro?
Forgot the 1987 Giro too.
0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:If I were sky I'd be sending Froome up in late moves and have Wiggins follow wheels anyway. Either way that scenario turns out, Sky win.
You'd isolate the yellow jersey and run the risk of Froome dragging Nibali with him up the road, thereby risking Froome *and* Nibali leapfrogging Wiggins in the overall standings.
You swap a 1-2 for a 1-3.
Plus your leader now has a less than 20s lead over Nibali in the overall standings. One slip from Froome and you've gone from 1-2 to 2-3. And not because Nibali has done anything clever, but simply because you've gifted yellow to him.
Now you're left with a gamble on the final TT - where Nibali will now start last - putting your men back where you want them in the GC.0 -
Who said Nibs would follow Froome?
Wiggins should be following Nibs. Froome can climb faster than nibs.
Send Froome out with 20km to go, or at the bottom of a big climb.
See what happens.0 -
Not if it takes it out of their legs for following days.Rick Chasey wrote:If I were sky I'd be sending Froome up in late moves and have Wiggins follow wheels anyway. Either way that scenario turns out, Sky win.
The race finishes in Paris and not before. Brailsford knows this.
It is all going to plan.None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:Who said Nibs would follow Froome?
Wiggins should be following Nibs. Froome can climb faster than nibs.
Send Froome out with 20km to go, or at the bottom of a big climb.
See what happens.
Well this didn't happen yesterday when Froome attacked....0 -
pitchshifter wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Who said Nibs would follow Froome?
Wiggins should be following Nibs. Froome can climb faster than nibs.
Send Froome out with 20km to go, or at the bottom of a big climb.
See what happens.
Well this didn't happen yesterday when Froome attacked....
Well no, but that was all too late. Circumstances were different for that to work. Anyway, Wiggins shouldn't have been putting his nose in the wind after Froome dropped back. No need.
Think Sastre in 2008 on the Alp.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:Who said Nibs would follow Froome?
Wiggins should be following Nibs. Froome can climb faster than nibs.
Send Froome out with 20km to go, or at the bottom of a big climb.
See what happens.
One question - Why?0
