Froome v Wiggins

pedro118118

Has anyone else noticed in recent interviews that Froome is far from gracious, when it comes to talking about the 2012 Tour? Bordering on outright resentment (at having to wait for Wiggo on a couple of occasions in the mountains) and a complete lack of acknowledgement/respect for Wiggins's win? Seems like he derives no satisfaction from being part of a winning team (unless he's the one doing the winning). His interview about today's stage (to Peyragudes) being a classic example. Froome was more intersted in talking about the 'bad' - ie being told to ride with his team leader, rather than chase down the break/stage win, than the 'good' - ie being an integral part of a winning team and doing his job fantastically well. Form Froome, the 'good' was the feeling in his legs on the day and the feeling of form he wasn't allowed to use. I know they don't necessarily 'get on', but jeez...

surrey_commuter

maybe he thinks Wiggins is a drug cheat and is angry with him and all of the other drug cheats? I think it is more telling how few people connected with pro-cycling are ambivalent about drug cheats

larkim

Maybe as a triple winner of the TdF (and in his mind, potentially could have already had 4) he feels a sense that he is in fact a superior cyclist to Wiggins and now has the stature to be able to push back on the (waning?) love for Wiggins without being derided in the press? He's an elite sportsman, humility and evaluation of the worth of others doesn't usually fit with the mindset required to become and be the best at what you do.

fat daddy

I suppose he could have just lied and wrapped his stories in bubble wrap and cotton wool so he doesn't offend people.

timothyw

I'm sure Froome as a now 3 time (and likely soon 4 time) winner of the tour resents having had to wait for Wiggo, as fundamentally he is someone who likes to win an awful lot - you kinda have to be to get to that level of cycling - and he is obviously of the view (and I doubt alone in it) that had he been let off the leash he could have won that tour (and so would now be looking at number 5, along with all the positive associations of being the first British tour winner, ringing the bell at the olympics etc...)

Honestly, if you think Wiggo is dirty I'm completely at a loss to how you could think that Froome is clean. It wasn't like Lance kept having to call back his clean domestiques in the high alps.

Really it's just a replay of the LeMond/Hinault story of 84/85 with a slightly different script, lacking the dramatic conclusion, so I do wonder if part of the story isn't just boxing style spin to generate clicks and articles.

Wiggins is fairly obviously the sort of person that could rub others up the wrong way - a bit of a marmite character - and it's obvious to see that Froome doesn't have any affection for him at all.

The ultimate FU from Froome to Wiggo would be for Froome to work on his TT and go take the hour record I think.

salsiccia1

I haven't read the interview, but generally interviewees answer the questions put to them. Did he raise things he wasn't asked about?

fat daddy

It happens all the time in sport though .... Take F1, look how annoyed the "number 2" driver is when they get the order to pull over and let the "number 1 " drive go past and win because they might need the points more further down the road.

Having your win taken away from you so someone else can win ..... I can only assume it would be like taking a toy of a toddler to give to the other kid because the parents like that one more .... and then the parents get cross because the denied child shows resentment, well "duh", what did you expect

pedro118118

larkim wrote:

Maybe as a triple winner of the TdF (and in his mind, potentially could have already had 4) he feels a sense that he is in fact a superior cyclist to Wiggins and now has the stature to be able to push back on the (waning?) love for Wiggins without being derided in the press? He's an elite sportsman, humility and evaluation of the worth of others doesn't usually fit with the mindset required to become and be the best at what you do.

Salsiccia1 wrote:

I haven't read the interview, but generally interviewees answer the questions put to them. Did he raise things he wasn't asked about?

If Froome thinks he is, "in fact a superior cyclist to Wiggins", he's deluded. Clearly, he is a more gifted climber, but in pretty much over other respect (TT, Classics, Track etc) Wiggins has shown himself to be vastly superior. Noted and agreed re: required mindset, though.

kingstongraham

He wrote about all this in his book. He pretty much sounded like a tool in that. It was published after he had been given full support the following year and always after then, and he seemed to be ranting about the fact that Sky hadn't supported him in 2012.

pedro118118

Salsiccia1 wrote:

I haven't read the interview, but generally interviewees answer the questions put to them. Did he raise things he wasn't asked about?

Question was pretty open-ended about his memories of the 2012 Stage, when Valverde (I think?) won. Answer was his feelings were a "mix of good and bad". "Bad" in that he was forced to follow team orders and "good" that he was so strong and feels he would've won that stage, if given the chance.

pedro118118

Surrey Commuter wrote:

maybe he thinks Wiggins is a drug cheat and is angry with him and all of the other drug cheats? I think it is more telling how few people connected with pro-cycling are ambivalent about drug cheats

All the other drug cheats, which he is head-and-shoulders above over the course of a 3-week Grand Tour?!

RichN95.

Salsiccia1 wrote:

I haven't read the interview, but generally interviewees answer the questions put to them. Did he raise things he wasn't asked about?

He was asked what he remembered about the Peyragudes climb in 2012 - and he gave the same answer he's given for five years - that he was feeling good and frustrated not to be able to go for the stage win. It wasn't a question about 2012 as a whole.

larkim

pedro118118 wrote:

larkim wrote:

Maybe as a triple winner of the TdF (and in his mind, potentially could have already had 4) he feels a sense that he is in fact a superior cyclist to Wiggins and now has the stature to be able to push back on the (waning?) love for Wiggins without being derided in the press? He's an elite sportsman, humility and evaluation of the worth of others doesn't usually fit with the mindset required to become and be the best at what you do.

Salsiccia1 wrote:

I haven't read the interview, but generally interviewees answer the questions put to them. Did he raise things he wasn't asked about?

If Froome thinks he is, "in fact a superior cyclist to Wiggins", he's deluded. Clearly, he is a more gifted climber, but in pretty much over other respect (TT, Classics, Track etc) Wiggins has shown himself to be vastly superior. Noted and agreed re: required mindset, though.

I should have qualified that as "a superior Grand Tour cyclist".

pedro118118

KingstonGraham wrote:

He wrote about all this in his book. He pretty much sounded like a tool in that. It was published after he had been given full support the following year and always after then, and he seemed to be ranting about the fact that Sky hadn't supported him in 2012.

Indeed. Perhaps unfairly, Froome is a massive fan of teamwork, so long as the team is put at his sole disposal. I may be wrong, but I cannot recall - post 2012 - any example of Froome working for anyone else, whether it be a 'secondary' stage race or a hilly Classic.

bigmat

It was an odd stage. Wiggo was happy to ease off once he knew Nibali wouldn't attack. Froome (rightly) wanted to chase down Valverde, ideally with Wiggins. I think Wiggins was making a point in making him wait. Bit silly really, but in the context of Frrome's earlier attack against team orders it kind of makes sense.

Froome might have been able to win that tour, but I'm not convinced his form was that much better than Wiggins. He was well beaten in the time trials, and looked a bit inconsistent on the climbs (a bit like he often does in the Vuelta). Also, Sky rightly backed the guy who had taken on the responsibility of team leadership all year, with the team built around him, on a parcours that perfectly suited him, who hadn't put a foot wrong all race and who was comfortably in yellow. Its madness to suggest Froome should ever have been allowed to ride for himself.

timothyw

I wonder if the 2012 animosity wasn't just about Wiggins but also about Sean Yates, the Team Sky director at the time - Cav didn't have any good words to say about him, and I thought Sean came across as a prick in his book.

pedro118118

larkim wrote:

pedro118118 wrote:

larkim wrote:

Maybe as a triple winner of the TdF (and in his mind, potentially could have already had 4) he feels a sense that he is in fact a superior cyclist to Wiggins and now has the stature to be able to push back on the (waning?) love for Wiggins without being derided in the press? He's an elite sportsman, humility and evaluation of the worth of others doesn't usually fit with the mindset required to become and be the best at what you do.

Salsiccia1 wrote:

I haven't read the interview, but generally interviewees answer the questions put to them. Did he raise things he wasn't asked about?

If Froome thinks he is, "in fact a superior cyclist to Wiggins", he's deluded. Clearly, he is a more gifted climber, but in pretty much over other respect (TT, Classics, Track etc) Wiggins has shown himself to be vastly superior. Noted and agreed re: required mindset, though.

I should have qualified that as "a superior Grand Tour cyclist".

Understood. With benefit of hindsight. Although, worth remembering that at that stage, Wiggins had already had 2 podiums at GTs (assuming LA's 2010 3rd struck off) and had won numerous prestigeous shorter stage races (Paris Nice, Dauphine, Romandie etc). Froome had acheived a podium place at the Vuelta, but otherwise very little by way of proper results during his tenure with both Sky and Barloworld. He proved to be the stonger climber at the 2012 Tour, but does this mean he would've won the race overall? We'll never know. Worth remembering Wiggins still put significant time into Froome against the clock. It would be very interesting to see Froome's stance if (for example) Landa or Henao suddenly uncovered a blistering batch of climbing form in the Pyranees/Alps and wanted the freedom to attack and chase stages.

pedro118118

TimothyW wrote:

I wonder if the 2012 animosity wasn't just about Wiggins but also about Sean Yates, the Team Sky director at the time - Cav didn't have any good words to say about him, and I thought Sean came across as a prick in his book.

Indeed. Who knows? I'm sure there was a complex mydriad of reasons why the relationships was a bit prickly. But ultimately, the plan was clear - Sky were backing Wiggins to the hilt and that means domestiques were just that; helpers. If Froome was unhappy with this approach/job, then he should've left Sky to lead another team when he had the chance in 2011. However, if he was made promises about being able to ride for stages in the mountains, then that's a different matter. Although I doubt it, given Brailsfords, "We have a Plan A and everything else is the alphabet mentality".

RichN95.

pedro118118 wrote:

TimothyW wrote:

I wonder if the 2012 animosity wasn't just about Wiggins but also about Sean Yates, the Team Sky director at the time - Cav didn't have any good words to say about him, and I thought Sean came across as a prick in his book.

Indeed. Who knows? I'm sure there was a complex mydriad of reasons why the relationships was a bit prickly. But ultimately, the plan was clear - Sky were backing Wiggins to the hilt and that means domestiques were just that; helpers. If Froome was unhappy with this approach/job, then he should've left Sky to lead another team when he had the chance in 2011. However, if he was made promises about being able to ride for stages in the mountains, then that's a different matter. Although I doubt it, given Brailsfords, "We have a Plan A and everything else is the alphabet mentality".

It was the last climb of the Tour, Wiggins had a two minute lead over Froome and Nibali with a TT to come. The Tour was in the bag. Froome only wanted to chase down Valverde for the stage (he only won by 19 seconds).

rick_chasey

pedro118118 wrote:

Worth remembering Wiggins still put significant time into Froome against the clock.

In the first TT Wiggins was 35 seconds ahead of Froome over 41km, who came in second. Is that such a lot?

And, having already had the Fenton incident, Froome came in second AGAIN behind Wiggins, this time 1.22 over 53km.

I mean, you can swing that either way.

Either, Wiggins had such a measure over Froome that he should have let him go for the stage, OR, the time wasn't all that significant.

Which is it?

r0bh

BigMat wrote:

Froome might have been able to win that tour, but I'm not convinced his form was that much better than Wiggins. He was well beaten in the time trials, and looked a bit inconsistent on the climbs (a bit like he often does in the Vuelta). Also, Sky rightly backed the guy who had taken on the responsibility of team leadership all year, with the team built around him, on a parcours that perfectly suited him, who hadn't put a foot wrong all race and who was comfortably in yellow. Its madness to suggest Froome should ever have been allowed to ride for himself.

This ^ - people seem to easily forget that Wiggins had a stellar year in 2012 leading up to the Tour, I mean he even won a sprint stage at Romandie FFS!

wallace_and_gromit

pedro118118 wrote:

If Froome thinks he is, "in fact a superior cyclist to Wiggins", he's deluded. Clearly, he is a more gifted climber, but in pretty much over other respect (TT, Classics, Track etc) Wiggins has shown himself to be vastly superior. Noted and agreed re: required mindset, though.

I'd pay good money to see Froome and Wiggins pair up for a top level Madison!

above_the_cows

wallace_and_gromit

pedro118118 wrote:

I know they don't necessarily 'get on', but jeez...

I thought it was in-necessarily ungracious tbh. It's 5 years, 3 TDF wins and 2 Olympic golds ago now. Froome's a bright guy and must surely have clocked that in the absence of a proper drugs bust against Wiggo, he (Froome) will always be a distant second in the popularity stakes with the masses.

Talking of popularity, if Jo Konta wins Wimbledon then it could he her vs the Froomedog (assuming he wins the Tour again) for SPOTY. This might cause a rumpus in the Daily Mail given their backgrounds!

salsiccia1

Froome is obviously a very driven and quite ruthless rider.

Looking at it from his point of view:

He's sacrificed himself in the 2011 Vuelta, when he was clearly stronger than Wiggins and even when he took the leaders jersey Sky insisted on riding for Wiggins. Probably cost him the win.

So in 2012, he's done his job, towed Wiggins up the climbs, generally ridden as requested. He wants another stage win and can see it's possible without compromising Wiggins' position, but he's not allowed to go.

Is it a surprise to see him look back at that stage with mixed feelings? I'm not saying any of those thoughts are right or wrong.

wallace_and_gromit

Salsiccia1 wrote:

Looking at it from his point of view:

He's sacrificed himself in the 2011 Vuelta, when he was still to sign a lucrative new contract with Sky.

I think my slight revision highlights his priority in 2011 and it wasn't really riding for Wiggins!

Even so, it's ancient history now and one would think he's won enough since then to rise above whatever feelings of resentment he had at the time. (Though if he had that aspect to his personality he may not have been so successful as a rider.)

ddraver

Bradley has been more than a little bit of a dick about this since 2012. I don't begrudge Froome a little payback

(Sorry RR, but...)

RichN95.

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Talking of popularity, if Jo Konta wins Wimbledon then it could he her vs the Froomedog (assuming he wins the Tour again) for SPOTY. This might cause a rumpus in the Daily Mail given their backgrounds!

I predict Froome will never come in the top three in that regardless of how many Tours he wins. He's just too low key, he seems to be completely baffled by the concept of celebrity.

RichN95.

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Salsiccia1 wrote:

Looking at it from his point of view:

He's sacrificed himself in the 2011 Vuelta, when he was still to sign a lucrative new contract with Sky.

I think my slight revision highlights his priority in 2011 and it wasn't really riding for Wiggins!

On one of the early climbing stages he sat up near the end having done his job and needlessly lost 30 seconds to save energy. Ultimately that cost him the race (that and Sky's comically bad TTT).

In the 2012 Tour Froome lost one and half minutes on stage 1 due to a puncture. Without that then the perceived tension throughout may have completely boiled over.

amrushton

might be my memory but wasn't it the last year of contract for Froome at Sky? Suddenly he turned out to be good but the commitment had always been to Wiggins who certainly in the TTs was superior.

thegreatdivide

Surrey Commuter wrote:

maybe he thinks Wiggins is a drug cheat and is angry with him and all of the other drug cheats? I think it is more telling how few people connected with pro-cycling are ambivalent about drug cheats

Yeah, the Prednisolone Kid thinks Wiggins is a drug cheat.