LAST weekend, Chris Froome became the first British cyclist to win the Tour de France twice.

The race as a whole was an excellent spectacle, with drama almost every day, a lot of it involving the main protagonists.

It was a really high-quality field, with Froome beating no less than four other riders who had also won one of the three grand tours held each year.

To win such a race is an incredible achievement, but the level of adulation that Froome is receiving seems to be well below the reception granted to Sir Bradley Wiggins back in 2012.

It is almost as if we are not as proud of Froome’s achievements, possibly because he spent his childhood growing up in Kenya and South Africa rather than central London.

It is certainly fair to say that British Cycling can take more credit for Wiggins’ achievements. Froome was only brought into the programme in his early 20s, while Wiggins went right through the system.

However, if you have read Froome’s excellent book, which I’m sure will be updated and re-released in time for Christmas, you’ll know that he claims to have always felt British, due to his upbringing.

A bigger problem may be the fact that the British public are almost used to cycling success these days.

It began on the track, with British riders clearing up at the Olympics, and after Wiggins broke the seal when it came to the world’s biggest bike race, we seemed to become a bit blaze towards the achievements of Froome, who has been unfortunate to follow so closely in the tyre tracks of his team-mate and rival.

It’s almost as if we expect a British rider to be challenging for the yellow jersey during the annual three-week slog around France, but until Wiggins and Froome came along, we hadn’t had a genuine contender for the best part of 50 years.

Froome’s achievements should not be underestimated though. By winning his second Tour, he joined a select band of just 20 men who have won the event on multiple occasions, while only seven have won it more than twice.

To have won for a second time despite the disgusting treatment he received on the roads and the constant baseless accusations of doping was exceptional.

The big question now is whether he can go on and win again next year, elevating his status in the history of cycling further.

With his skills and the strength of Team Sky behind him, it’s certainly a possibility, but it may be even harder next year.

His margin of victory over the Colombian Nairo Quintana was 1min 12sec, which is nothing when you consider that the race took almost 85 hours to complete.

Quintana lost 1:28 on a flat stage early in the race after being caught on the wrong side of a split caused by crosswinds.

Had he not made this mistake, things could have been very different. Quintana looked far more comfortable in the closing stages of the race, taking time out of Froome on two big climbs.

Had the British man not had such a big advantage in the bank, could he have responded? I’m not sure.

However, the route of this year’s race suited Quintana, a specialist climber, over Froome, who is more of an all-rounder.

There were more mountain-top finishes than normal and a lack of significant time-trials, where Froome would be expected to gain time on the Colombian. The organisers could choose a similar route again next year, but it’s more likely that it will be slightly better suited to Froome’s abilities.

Either way, it promises to be another epic battle – one that I certainly hope Froome is able to win.