Froome or Wiggins?

[cpwigan]

Who is better?

[jobo]

Lot of speculation surrounding Froome. Don't know if any of it is true but I can't remember Wiggins suffering the abuse Froome has so with very limited knowledge I'll say Bradley is better.

[Garry Riley]

At this moment in time for me it's Froome. Also Froome rhymes with Zoom.

[KOOCH]

Don't really care as neither play for Wigan but if I did have a preference it would be Sir Bradley as he supports Wigan.

[endoman]

Very different. Wiggins has Olympic medals, World TT champs, Tour and some good results in the classics. Froome has 2 tours but no track history, nor any real results prior to Team Sky. Clearly a very strong rider at the moment, only time will tell. I know who I'd rather spend some time with!

[Wandering Warrior]

I'm afraid it has to be Froome. Much less of a character than Wiggins but could have more than likely won it when he came second in 2012.

[cpwigan]

I must confess I have been impressed with BMX racing currently being shown on TV.

[cpwigan]

Wigging would seem the better all round cyclists but Froome seems better on Tours.

[markill]

This from Matt Slater sums it up really well I think: Chris Froome: Where does he rank among British cycling greats? - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/33663653

[Sutty]

It's almost impossible to compare the two of them. Wiggins only challenged for grand tour GC places much later in his career than Froome has, but he's achieved almost countless records and medals on the track. Froome came from an MTB background, so has no track pedigree to speak of. As an all rounder and longevity, I'd go for Wiggins. But I think if Sky can keep (which they probably will) a good team around him, I can see Froome winning many more grand tours. It'll be interesting to see how he goes in the Vuelta, if he lines up for that.