-
Froome’s performance was all over the place in this Giro.
He didn't lose eight minutes on a single stage, then wipe the floor with the rest of the field the next day though, did he?
He crashed on the morning of the opening stage, and clearly suffered from the effects of that crash for the opening few stages. But at Etna, he showed his underlying form was good, only to fall on the same side again a couple of days later and lose another minute the day after. He then recovered in the second week, enough to be able to win the stage on the Zoncolan, but probably went too deep as he suffered a bit the next day, losing another minute or so. But then, in the final week, when you have to be on top of your game, he was, whereas others either stumbled, i.e. Yates and Pinot, or were knackered, Pozzovivo and Dumoulin.
It was an incredible comeback, but the nature of the Giro lends itself to the strongest rider in the final week winning the race, as Nibali demonstrated two years ago.
-
Except a lot of performances were all over in the Giro, Doumoulin proving the only other consistent GC rider over three weeks. Hindsight is a great thing, and with it Yates burning matches day by day and riders like Pinot and Pozzo trying to follow and doing the same paved the way for a softly softly catchy monkey approach by Froome.
And Sky executed it well, Froome took his chance and Doumoulin was isolated and dithered.
Froome’s ride got compared to Landis. As I was watching it unfold I was thinking about Contador’s race-winning attack in the Vuelta a few years back. And after I can’t help think if Contador has done it everyone would be purring.
Instead they raise the ghost of Landis. A rider with potential but at the time barely more than a domestique. He cracked the day before, lost time, dosed up and ride over 8 cols solo against the combined wrath of a doped peloton.
So a shite comparison to Froome. Winner on the Zoncolan, strong in the ITT, still in fourth and the leader of the race riding beyond himself.