How good is Chris Froome?

fat daddy

Shipley wrote:

He has no style on a bike whatsoever,!

ah, you want someone that looks good to win ...... that's the x-factor isn't it

Perhaps we need a cycling competition where all the riders show video footage of their family, tell a sad story about how everyone they love overcame cancer then died anyway and are not around to watch them compete, cry a bit, wear some fashionable clothes and loads of make up to give them a flawless appearance ... then at the end of the day the TV veiwers can call in to vote who wins ?

... mind you I think Bertie would come out of retirement if this happened

bobmcstuff

Ryan_W wrote:

He is boring as f**k though. Zero flair or personality IMO.

Like the Murray of Cycling.

I think he's got a bit more about him than Murray. Although that's not hard!

I've also found him more exciting to watch the last couple of years, I think they're more confident so more likely to mix things up a bit.

okgo

Bo Duke wrote:

Froome's a great climber, he's always there at the sprint just out of trouble but has the speed, he's a great TT'er and he's a great descender. Plus he's a leader and he's mentally strong enough to boss a GT, unlike other good riders like LRP, NQ, Rigo etc..

What more do you want for heaven's sake, he's the real deal!

This.

LOL @ "getting better at TT's" - he's been a world class time trialist for years.

RichN95.

Ryan_W wrote:

He is boring as f**k though. Zero flair or personality IMO.

Like the Murray of Cycling.

a) He's not a boring racer by any measure.
b) The boring personality is in part due to an antagonistic media obsessed with doping. It inspires dull textbook answers. Tom Hanks would seem boring if all people ever did was ask about his tax affairs.

hypster

There's a certain group of people who can't stand winners, especially dominant ones and Chris Froome falls into that category for me. These people tend to root for the "plucky underdog" who try very hard but never seem to quite make it. They mistake that effort for flair or panache but in reality they just don't have the all-round ability to win a grand tour say.

I prefer my idols to just crush the opposition - Eddy Merckx, Migual Indurain and now Chris Froome

ryan_w-2

Sagan and TD are my boys.

Froome is exceptional, not hating on him at all, but paired with Team Skys 'buy all the best riders' ethos, he just doesn't excite me. However, I did enjoy seeing the brutal effort Kwiatkowski put it for his man.

rick_chasey

RichN95 wrote:

b) The boring personality is in part due to an antagonistic media obsessed with doping. It inspires dull textbook answers. Tom Hanks would seem boring if all people ever did was ask about his tax affairs.

Lance did alright.

RichN95.

Rick Chasey wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

b) The boring personality is in part due to an antagonistic media obsessed with doping. It inspires dull textbook answers. Tom Hanks would seem boring if all people ever did was ask about his tax affairs.

Lance did alright.

Barely anyone asked him about doping in his prime. Most of the media were to busy fellating him to ask a question.

epc06

hypster wrote:

There's a certain group of people who can't stand winners, especially dominant ones and Chris Froome falls into that category for me. These people tend to root for the "plucky underdog" who try very hard but never seem to quite make it. They mistake that effort for flair or panache but in reality they just don't have the all-round ability to win a grand tour say.

I prefer my idols to just crush the opposition - Eddy Merckx, Migual Indurain and now Chris Froome

If he is still riding when his powers diminish and is still rocking up at the tour as a 'has been' then I am positive many of his detractors will have warm to him.

salsiccia1

RichN95 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

b) The boring personality is in part due to an antagonistic media obsessed with doping. It inspires dull textbook answers. Tom Hanks would seem boring if all people ever did was ask about his tax affairs.

Lance did alright.

Barely anyone asked him about doping in his prime. Most of the media were to busy fellating him to ask a question.

Bonus points for getting 'fellating' into your post

rick_chasey

Yeah but when they did it was firecracker stuff.

I mean, imagine a Chris Froome podcast on the Giro, every day.

Zzzzzzzzzzzz.


The guy lacks charisma. It happens.

okgo

Good job this thread is about how good he is at riding bikes then isn't it.

fat daddy

okgo wrote:

Good job this thread is about how good he is at riding bikes then isn't it.

Its the age of the celebrity .... what matters is who you are not what you do. I am sure once he has appeared on Strictly, masterchef, the jump, and get me out of here, his ratings will go up

ocdupalais

Rick Chasey wrote:

The guy lacks charisma. It happens.

Whereas the Yates brothers, Quintana, Bardet and Nibali have got dishwater looking for a new joke book?

bobmcstuff

http://www.givemesport.com/1107981-chri ... girlfriend

In a rare instance of the "sponsored content" (down there \/ ) actually being relevant - an example of Froome doing something slightly interesting.

bobmcstuff

He's also relatively good value on Twitter, although he probably has very little to do with his own Twitter posts.

tangled_metal

He rocks up to THE grand tour and wins it over and over again. What else do you want?

PS personally I want him to win something else not just the TdF. Vuelta would be good but a classic or two wouldn't go amiss. Still I think he's at the top of the tree for grand tours. If sky ever changed their priorities to the other tours he'd win those just maybe not in the same year as another TdF win.

m.r.m.

He is not going to get prettier on the bike or more charismatic off it. Winning Liege or Lombardia would do wonders for him though.

tangled_metal

I'm sure others will know more but I'd.bet the riders most people are impressed by in the past week have won a variety of races such as liege as well as multiple tours. Froome will.never be in the league of Merckx who I'm certain won more variety of races. Sorry I'm a casual observer of pro cycle racing since the early 90s, I don't have a head full of racing stats.

okgo

Mercx would have no hope in hell today of having a similar palmares IMO. Sport has changed, everyone almost has to specialize now. Mercx would be far too heavy for TDF.

RichN95.

Tangled Metal wrote:

I'm sure others will know more but I'd.bet the riders most people are impressed by in the past week have won a variety of races such as liege as well as multiple tours. Froome will.never be in the league of Merckx who I'm certain won more variety of races. Sorry I'm a casual observer of pro cycle racing since the early 90s, I don't have a head full of racing stats.

Merckx was from a different age. In his last Tour there were only 130 riders in 13 teams and 126 of them came from just five countries. The northern classics were glorified Belgian championships.
There's no way Merckx could ride like he did then now, he'd be burnt out by April. He'd have to be more like Valverde.

People see sports stars from the past though rose tinted glasses, but the truth is put any top sportsman or woman from 1970 (as they were at that time) up against their modern day equivalent and they'd get well beaten with few exceptions (I think Ali could beat Joshua for example)

tangled_metal

But put them in a modern training regime don't you think some of them would preform in the modern era? I mean you don't think a cycling talent would train to the sports science standards off the day they're in? Merckx as say the same age as Froome today with the same access to the benefits that today's sports science can offer would he be outperforming Froome?

I think it's hard to compare riders in the past eras against today's sport as simply as comparing the racing they did. Surely as that racing evolved so did the science behind training for it. A talent like Merckx had isn't going to remain the same of time travel moved the guy into the modern era. If he'd been born into Froome's generation he'd be at it near the top of the tree. Since the science behind cycling as well as the sport itself has changed it's not easy to dismiss Merckx and others just by comparing the sport in both eras. Well that's my take in this. I'm sure others would have a better idea of this.

m.r.m.

I think saying someone from a previous era cannot under any circumstance perform now, is unfair. None of us can know and I think it's more realistic for Merckx' dominance to be greatly reduced, but for him to still be able to drop weight and perform in a variety of races. Singular talents like Valverde show that it is possible to compete in a variety of races.

Froome has hardly tried beyond GT's. He seems entirely content to win those, since he is clearly the best GT rider and has the best GT team every single year. Optimizing your season for just the Tour or just the Tour + Vuelta is certainly smart, but the flip side is you do not get the same admiration like riders who perform all year round like Valverde or Sagan.

I think Dumoulin, Kwiatkowski, Chaves etc. could become riders that win GT's and classics. Froome could be seen as one of the best cyclists of all time. In my eyes he would need to win more than just the Tour for that though. Unfortunately, winning the Tour 6-8 times would accomplish this as well in most people's eyes. :?

I would love to see him go beyond his comfort zone win or lose.

rick_chasey

Alright, if Merckx is too far gone to be a good comparison, what about Indurain?

RichN95.

Rick Chasey wrote:

Alright, if Merckx is too far gone to be a good comparison, what about Indurain?

Even then, the Giro/Tour in his day was made more possible by the Giro finishing in mid June - a week less gap than there is between the Tour and Vuelta now.

And that's before we even think about the changes that happened in the early 90s

Also he never won a non TT stage in the Tour during his five wins.

Froome has won two MTF stages solo in the Yellow Jersey in different years. Aside from Armstrong, who was the last to do that. Fignon?

milemuncher1

I went for a ride with Froome last year, when he was doing some work at a wind tunnel, at a University local to me. He's quite good, and he's demonstrably got the mad skillz to win several TdFs. I'd like to see if he can win a few more GTs, but for now, he would seem to be the best ( clean ) GT rider, of the current 'usual suspects'.

RichN95.

A question. Who would you rather spend time with - Froome or Sagan?

Second question - how long is that time?

mfin

RichN95 wrote:

A question. Who would you rather spend time with - Froome or Sagan?

Second question - how long is that time?

Neither.

People who meet famous people and get all excited about the experience are mostly the last kinds of people the famous people would want to spend any time with anyway.

If I was a pro cyclist the last person I'd want to hang around with for any time at all would be some tw*t of a cycling fan who's all excited. So, I'd feel sorry for the cyclist in this hypothetical question who has to spend time with a dull fan.

...but, I know what you mean if you phrase it differently...

If you really HAD to hang around with one of the two, which would it be? The answer for me is probably Froome, as Sagan comes across like he's a bit thick and my guess is that would wear a bit thin. Which do I find the more exciting cyclist of the two though? Sagan.

rick_chasey

RichN95 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Alright, if Merckx is too far gone to be a good comparison, what about Indurain?

Even then, the Giro/Tour in his day was made more possible by the Giro finishing in mid June - a week less gap than there is between the Tour and Vuelta now.

And that's before we even think about the changes that happened in the early 90s

Also he never won a non TT stage in the Tour during his five wins.

Froome has won two MTF stages solo in the Yellow Jersey in different years. Aside from Armstrong, who was the last to do that. Fignon?

.

If we assume Indurain's bike kit was pretty inferior, he climbed Ventoux only 2 seconds slower than Froome, for example.

And it wasn't like Indurain either needed to win MTFs and he often gave them away when he was at the sharp end.

okgo

He was also on EPO.