Was Wiggins 'lucky' to win the tour?

This isn’t a Wiggins bashing thread, and hes obviously a supreme athlete, but I can’t help thinking he would never have won the tour any other year for the following reasons…

The route in 2012 was tailor made for him…2 big TTs and the mountain stages weren’t as harsh as in in most other editions of the race

He had the strongest team in the field

The competition really wasn’t that good that year. No Bertie, Nibles not in great shape, his biggest rival before the race was a slightly past it Cadel. Basically his closest competitor that year was riding in support of him rather than against him.

Just to reiterate when I say ‘lucky’, i mean that the stars aligned nicely for him re the above, rather than he wasn’t the strongest rider for the course that year

Anyone disagree? are there any other years that a man with Wiggins attributes and 2012 form could have been successful ?

We will never know as the all gains made on the TT’s could have been lost in the mountains if the nearest rival had free will to attack!?!?

If Froome had been allowed to, he would have won it that year.

Again, not knocking the achievement in the slightest, I was immensely proud that a Brit had won the tour, but the route suited him, definitely.

We will never know as the all gains made on the TT’s could have been lost in the mountains if the nearest rival had free will to attack

Very true.

Looking at how the ‘pure climbers’ couldn’t really distance him, then I would say ‘no’ to your question.

As well as the legs, he had the confidence, the presence of mind and the standing within the peloton to make it all work. None of this was luck imo.

Looking at how the ‘pure climbers’ couldn’t really distance him, then I would say ‘no’ to your question.

Did you miss the bit where Froome tore his legs off?

But he did win it that year and nothing, other than a doping scandal, will change that. Froome could have fallen on a descent, whacked his head on a lamp post and not been as lucky as another Sky team member.

Did you miss the bit where Froome tore his legs off?

You mean the bit where Froome chipped off the front for 5 seconds to try impress his girlfriend? Who knows whether he would have made anything stick. Look at yesterdays stage; there were plenty of occasions where rivals got quick gaps over Froome but couldn’t make it stick.

I think every Tour winner needs a big dose of luck.
Crashes, mechanicals, weather, illness, the terrain, the team composition all play a huge part.

One of the things about Lance that always surprised me was just how lucky he got compared to a lot of his rivals, he was never involved in any major crashes.

Same with Wiggins, he crashed out with a broken collarbone when he was on of the favourites, who knows how that might have ended had he escaped unscathed.

We will never know as the all gains made on the TT’s could have been lost in the mountains if the nearest rival had free will to attack

Depends, what if he’d lost time on other day(s) though? What if Wiggins had dropped the peloton on some other day(s) and Froome hadn’t had a response. Froome just happened to be stronger on one day infront of the cameras.

You could argue any rider is ‘lucky’ to win, in any year a few contenders crash out, some have bad years, someone’s banned, the course suits them etc.

I’m pretty sure that BW has said something along the lines that 2012 was quite possibly/probably his only chance to have won given that it suited him perfectly. On that basis, I don’t think he was lucky except that it happened that that route happened to coincide with the right point in his career but then you could say that about almost any tour which always has a balance of climbing/TTing/whatever which will suit some riders more than others.

I think every Tour winner needs a big dose of luck.

I agree completely with this. The Winner of any large, international team event needs luck as well as skill, athletic ability and great team mates.

Maybe the TDF course suited him that year, but surely isn’t that the case for most winners anyway? If your weak point is climbing you’re not going to win, if you’re weak at TT’s you’ll certainly be at a disadvantage if there are 2 TT’s in there too.

Froome just happened to be stronger on one day infront of the cameras.

And Wiggo wasn’t motivated to chase him or Valverde down at that point.

It’s impossible to see what would have happened. The team dynamics would have been completely different if Froome was on another team.

Yes the stars aligned for him but then the tour route changes from year to year partly to shake up the head of the race and allow different riders a sniff at the overall.

I think that having Cavendish in the squad meant that although Cav was left to freelance for the sprints most of the time the focus of the squad still wasn’t 100% on the GC in the way that it is for Froome. So I would argue that he had a squad that was overall weaker than the current one.

I may be looking back with rose tinted spectacles but I think he also won pretty much everything else he entered in the run up to the tour. So he was in the shape of his life and exceptionally focused and a rider of his quality with that form and focus would be a top ten contender in any tour. From there it only takes a bit of luck and a lack of off days particularly in the early stages when the GC order is being formed and he could find himself in contention for the overall.

I also don’t think the route suiting him was a coincidence.

I think ASO wanted Wiggo to win as he was seen as clean and a worthy champion. They actually built the course around a Sky/Wiggo win deliberately based on previous form.

Surely any winner could be the winner because the course suited them?

No more lucky than any other tour winner

Nibles not in great shape

I would disagree about that, Nibbles was pretty strong that year but not enough to do anything to make up the time losses on the TT’s or to break the 1-2 froome/BW in the mountains.
Froome also lost a significant wedge of time in the TT’s as well, i remember the speculation about how close he would be to BW in the final TT and then he got boshed round the head.
I had a similar discussion with a friend about Nibbles TDF win last year. Losing Froome and Bertie gave him a free pass (as much as one exists in the tour) to win it.
A perfect route fell in BW’s lap in 2012, but he still had to be the best rider round that perfect route to win it.

Couldn’t last year’s win be put down to luck? A number of contenders didn’t make it much further than the cobbles.

He beat nibbles in 2009 without a team riding for him and finished in 4th behind 2 suspect performances

he also won pretty much everything else he entered in the run up to the tour

This.

He won all the usual races you’d expect the Tour winner to win, as well as a few more. He was the strongest rider that year.

One thing the tour in 2012 gave us was the Yellow jersey in the lead-out train for the World Champion to win the sprint on the Champs Elyses
It was amazing to watch and is one of the greatest TDF moments in my 20+ years of watching the tour

Wiggins didn’t win due to luck, he won by being the best rider over the 3 weeks, which as others have noted was no surprise as he was the best GC rider all year. Smashed the Olympics TT not longer after also, beating Froome again.

He beat nibbles in 2009 without a team riding for him and finished in 4th behind 2 suspect performances

I’m guessing you’re saying that A. Scleck was the non suspect performer in 2009? I think you are being very generous.

at least 2 then, I don’t think Schleck has ever been proved of anything

at least 2 then, I don’t think Schleck has ever been proved of anything

You’re right, nothing proven. Only his inseparable brother was banned.

And there were some rather large payments (for advice only, of course) to questionable doctors…

At that level of competition, it might be said.
“You make your own luck”.

Not a Wiggo fan, didn’t care for his hissy-fit and using the ‘C’ word.

He held the peloton back during the tac fiasco, where a real attack could have been executed.
But as others have pointed out.
We can only discuss what happened at any point during any stage. But we can’t possibly know what Wiggo could have produced, had things gone differently for him during his tour.

Hopk1ns – Member
Surely any winner could be the winner because the course suited them?

Very no.

The tour organisers, it’s alledged, were so fed up with Merckx winning. That later tours during his reign were devised to suit others, in the hope of seeing someone else win.

Merckx still prevailed!

I suppose what we don’t necessarily see is how much work went on behind the scenes, and by this I mean the amount of training and effort put in by BW to get in shape to have a crack at the GC.

I’m sure I read an account (possibly by Brailsford) after his win about the level of training intensity, and trying to get BW’s weight down whilst keeping his power output until they reached the magic figure.

Doubtless the TT’s that year played to his strengths, but I’m sure he didn’t just quite the track and think, I’ll have a crack the GC, without putting in a significant amount of prep work.

They actually built the course around a Sky/Wiggo win deliberately based on previous form.

sauce?

Don’t they mix it up each year anyway?

if there had been less TT and more climbing would froome have been the team leader that year ie the team was based around the course not the other way around (or was BW in way better shape anyway?)

When TS was formed, BW was their first team leader and TS also announced their ambition to win the TdF within their first 5 years.
Therefore, it was a fore gone that BW would be their TdF team leader.

Surely any winner could be the winner because the course suited them?

ASO would love a French winner, but that doesn’t mean they could engineer a course to produce it.
The course in 2012 was unusually skewed towards the TTs, just as this years is skewed towards the climbers. It was also the prefect storm in terms of who was missing, but it’s not Wiggin’s fault that Bertie had too much beef.
As to Froome – at that point Wiggins had earned the right to lead the Sky, Froome hadn’t. If he’d have left and been on another (weaker) team, would he have been able to take as much time off Wiggins as he lost in the TTs – i doubt it but we’ll never know.
Wiggins certainly worked very hard for his luck !

Wiggins wasn’t lucky, he deserved the win.
He was lucky to have Froome as a support-man.
Froome is now lucky to have Porte and G. Thomas as support-men.
They are both exceptional riders but Froome is the better rider, hence why Wiggo hasn’t gone back to Sky.

So the underlying premise of the argument is that TTs aren’t really a good way of deciding who the strongest rider is?

It’s not called the race of truth for nothing.

And it’s basically how Indurain won his five; take time in the TTs, defend in the mountains.

Arguable all races are won by the person to whom that course is best suited. That’s why we now have specialists for each race (the one day classics, grand tours, worlds etc)

He was ‘unlucky’ that most of the preceding years’ TdF GC contenders (pre-Cadel) were most likely on the juice, whereas I firmly believe BW has never doped (listen to his ‘Desert Island Disks’ interview for a profound insight to why this might be).

It’s likely that BW would have risen to the ascendent far earlier if Twuntstrong et al. hadn’t crapped all over the roost… Instead, it feels as if his ‘lucky’ moment only happened towards the back end of his career.

Definitely a worthy moment though.

Just to reiterate when I say ‘lucky’, i mean that the stars aligned nicely for him re the above, rather than he wasn’t the strongest rider for the course that year

I think it was a case of the stars aligning that year. The right route, the right team, the right opposition. Not to say he wouldn’t have won under different circumstances, but if you could have tailored the situation for Wiggins, it wouldn’t have been far off what he got.

Still took his chance very well, didn’t put a foot wrong, made the most of his strengths.

And as has been said, it was one in a series of big wins in a pretty perfect season for him.

I think it was a case of the stars aligning that year. The right route, the right team, the right opposition. Not to say he wouldn’t have won under different circumstances, but if you could have tailored the situation for Wiggins, it wouldn’t have been far off what he got.

Sure – but then that applies to 100% of all TDF (indeed all GT) winners since 1990

Sure – but then that applies to 100% of all TDF (indeed all GT) winners since 1990

I don’t think that’s true, certainly not to the same extent as Wiggins’ win.