How good is Chris Froome?

milton50

A 3 time Tour winner. Stats aren't everything so how does he rank amongst the pantheon of Grand Tour winners?

Better than Fignon? On a par with Indurain?

Discuss.

salsiccia1

Milton50 wrote:

Better than Fignon?

Possibly, but I'd like to see Froome win one of the other GTs at least once to say yes.

Milton50 wrote:

On a par with Indurain?

Not yet.

Alex99

Milton50 wrote:

A 3 time Tour winner. Stats aren't everything so how does he rank amongst the pantheon of Grand Tour winners?

Better than Fignon? On a par with Indurain?

Discuss.

Merckx seemed comfortable saying on TV saying that Froome might be a better stage racer than himself. Merckx, not one to give such compliments lightly.

johnboy183

Very.

Cannock Chase

Very very

Secteur

How good? I reckon he's good enough to win the TdF three times.

To be truly great in the general cycling sense of the word, he needs to win a world championships at the very minimun.

A classics win and another GT win (Giro / Vuelta) would also go a long way to showing strength and depth.

Remember though he's had a couple of GT 2nd places and a ITT world champ 2nd (or was it 3rd?) place.

So he's not half bad ;-p

Alex99

Secteur wrote:

How good? I reckon he's good enough to win the TdF three times.

To be truly great in the general cycling sense of the word, he needs to win a world championships at the very minimun.

A classics win and another GT win (Giro / Vuelta) would also go a long way to showing strength and depth.

Remember though he's had a couple of GT 2nd places and a ITT world champ 2nd (or was it 3rd?) place.

So he's not half bad ;-p

Bronze in ITT London 2012 Olympics.

milton50

Secteur wrote:

How good? I reckon he's good enough to win the TdF three times.

To be truly great in the general cycling sense of the word, he needs to win a world championships at the very minimun.

A classics win and another GT win (Giro / Vuelta) would also go a long way to showing strength and depth.

Remember though he's had a couple of GT 2nd places and a ITT world champ 2nd (or was it 3rd?) place.

So he's not half bad ;-p

Yeh, but I'm just talking about Grand Tours here. I mean clearly some one like Lemond was a better all round cyclist because he is a two time world champion, and has several podiums in the monuments. But was he a better a Grand Tour rider?

Secteur

Alex99 wrote:

Bronze in ITT London 2012 Olympics.

D'oh sorry of course - that's the one I meant.

TheBigBean

Alex99 wrote:

Milton50 wrote:

A 3 time Tour winner. Stats aren't everything so how does he rank amongst the pantheon of Grand Tour winners?

Better than Fignon? On a par with Indurain?

Discuss.

Merckx seemed comfortable saying on TV saying that Froome might be a better stage racer than himself. Merckx, not one to give such compliments lightly.

I'm not sure he was being all that complimentary. He was mostly saying that so he go to go on about how he had to ride all year, but in spite of that hardship he still won i.e. Froome gets to be a potentially better stage racer because he can specialise. I find ignoring anything Merckx says to be helpful.

Secteur

Milton50 wrote:

Yeh, but I'm just talking about Grand Tours here. I mean clearly some one like Lemond was a better all round cyclist because he is a two time world champion, and has several podiums in the monuments. But was he a better a Grand Tour rider?

Well, lets consider what makes a good GT rider;

VO2Max?
Team leadership skills?
Ability to climb & TT (how best to define these?)
Best team of domestiques?
1980 tactics / racing very different to 2016 tactics / racing
What else?...

I think it's hard to find a better GT rider than Froome, but each GT great has skill sets in different areas and in different generations so a direct comparison is hard.

rick_chasey

Best of his generation.

tangled_metal

Question relates to the age old question in sport, would (insert name of old hero from yesteryear) beat (insert name of current champion) if they had modern gear/training/nutrition/support/money?

Basically I think that all you can be say is the heros of yesteryear would do well in the.modern era. Merckx would have done well in any era I think. I do wonder if the modern era champions would have done well in n the days of no support where competitors carried their own tools / inner tubes and had to fix their own bikes mid race.

Of course it would be nice to think that talent would always come out on top.

inseine

Rick Chasey wrote:

Best of his generation.

I suppose he's better than Nibali. Contador is a different generation?

okgo

He is better than Contador.

Who lets not forget has been busted for cheating.

inseine

okgo wrote:

He is better than Contador.

Who lets not forget has been busted for cheating.

Contador is clearly better, on an all time list. Froome might turn out to be better.

Alex99

TheBigBean wrote:

Alex99 wrote:

Milton50 wrote:

A 3 time Tour winner. Stats aren't everything so how does he rank amongst the pantheon of Grand Tour winners?

Better than Fignon? On a par with Indurain?

Discuss.

Merckx seemed comfortable saying on TV saying that Froome might be a better stage racer than himself. Merckx, not one to give such compliments lightly.

I'm not sure he was being all that complimentary. He was mostly saying that so he go to go on about how he had to ride all year, but in spite of that hardship he still won i.e. Froome gets to be a potentially better stage racer because he can specialise. I find ignoring anything Merckx says to be helpful.

Yeah, he's been saying that since Lemond was winning. It sounded as close to a compliment as I've heard from him.

Alex99

Milton50 wrote:

A 3 time Tour winner. Stats aren't everything so how does he rank amongst the pantheon of Grand Tour winners?

Better than Fignon? On a par with Indurain?

Discuss.

I guess you're trying to get at, ability, rather than palmares. Maybe impossible to say. You might just get a headache.

professeur

Milton50 wrote:

A 3 time Tour winner. Stats aren't everything so how does he rank amongst the pantheon of Grand Tour winners?

Better than Fignon? On a par with Indurain?

Discuss.

I think he's overtaken Fignon now but he's nowhere near Indurain. The latter did the Giro-Tour double in consecutive years so I don't think he will ever overtake Miguel.

rick_chasey

inseine wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Best of his generation.

Contador is a different generation?

Yup.

DeVlaeminck

I'd like to see more of a challenge, he can only beat what's put in front of him but if Quintana can't do better than this year you'd have to say it's not a vintage period for grand tour riders. Nibali is one who makes the best of his gifts rather than a supremely gifted rider, Contador due to age, bans and crashes has been unable to really provide the opposition he might have done and that's about it.

hypster

I think there's always ifs, buts and maybes but I also think it's pretty clear Chris Froome should have won the Vuelta in 2011 had he been released by Wiggins from domestique duties. As it was he only lost to Cobo by 13 seconds.

I'm not going to speculate about the Wiggins TdF win in 2012 because again it was clear that Froome was in a supporting role to Wiggins and that's how these team tactics necessarily pan out. All of the past great riders have several instances where they could have extended their palmares but for one reason or another.

I think Chris Froome is the best of his generation and clearly has more to come. The favourite for TT gold in Rio and maybe even going to the Vuelta as well this year so it will be interesting to see what our perspective is in a couple of month's time.

I'm sure that he will win more grand tours because it's hard to see past Sky's dedication and dominance at the moment.

milton50

professeur wrote:

Milton50 wrote:

A 3 time Tour winner. Stats aren't everything so how does he rank amongst the pantheon of Grand Tour winners?

Better than Fignon? On a par with Indurain?

Discuss.

I think he's overtaken Fignon now but he's nowhere near Indurain. The latter did the Giro-Tour double in consecutive years so I don't think he will ever overtake Miguel.

What I was getting at with that argument is that Indurain won all of his Grand Tours by smashing everyone in long TTs and then hanging on in the mountains. Would Froome get beat by 3 minutes in a flat time trial?

So Indurain ended up with fantastic palmares but if you were looking at ability versus ability, based solely on your judgement, I would say there is not much to choose between the two. Perhaps Indurain shades it in terms of longevity and consistency.

okgo

The speeds Froome and co are going up and down hills show that this is every bit as hard a time to be a pro as ever, drugs aside, while I hate giving that utter wanchor on digger forum the time many links have appeared to show they're climbing not far off the blood like jam years.

He will end up having a better palmares than bertie, I'd rather win the big race 4 times than bother with the support races in Italy or Spain, but agree he needs to do something in a classic/world/olympics. But I think he might well rectify that - which classic does he have best chance of, that is the tough question, LBL?

markhewitt1978

It's hard to judge when although he has won other things he's pretty much solely focussed on the tour, which is partly how he's managed to win it three times.

jimnm

Watch Peter Sagan, he will over shadow CF eventually in every respect. He is a real class act.

okgo

Sagan will 'never' even try to win a grand tour, let alone actually do it, he is a totally different rider - he may well go on to be one of the greatest in what he does, I suppose he will be up against Boonen/Cancellara for the classics win numbers etc...

professeur

Milton50 wrote:

professeur wrote:

Milton50 wrote:

A 3 time Tour winner. Stats aren't everything so how does he rank amongst the pantheon of Grand Tour winners?

Better than Fignon? On a par with Indurain?

Discuss.

I think he's overtaken Fignon now but he's nowhere near Indurain. The latter did the Giro-Tour double in consecutive years so I don't think he will ever overtake Miguel.

What I was getting at with that argument is that Indurain won all of his Grand Tours by smashing everyone in long TTs and then hanging on in the mountains. Would Froome get beat by 3 minutes in a flat time trial?

So Indurain ended up with fantastic palmares but if you were looking at ability versus ability, based solely on your judgement, I would say there is not much to choose between the two. Perhaps Indurain shades it in terms of longevity and consistency.

I'd have to take a look at the results from back then but I'm pretty sure Indurain was smashing everyone in the time trials: LeMond, Fignon, Rominger... He was also clinging on to some great climbers, though he didn't win MTFs like Froome. On balance, I think he'd have the edge over Froome.

If Froome wins Olympic TT gold and the hour record I'll change my mind

okgo

I doubt he will go for the hour, however, despite the fact he doesn't have the engine of brad wiggins (which almost nobody does) if he gets better weather than Wiggins he could probably get really close.

trek_dan

Mercx is one to talk about having to race all year. Somewhat easier when doped to the gills, bearing in mind he got popped for PEDs 3 times in his career.

joelsim

Unless a WC course has a summit finish it's very unlikely to happen as a few have better sprint finishes.