Bigger Achievement: Rio or Doha?

[Asero831]

Which one of these 2016 races will be a bigger achievement
Hilly OR or Flat WC?

Taking everything into consideration, historical impact, commercial value, quality of competition, relevance, parcours complexity, etc

 

[spalco]

Historically Doha of course, but the olympic road race has gained a very large amount of prestige in recent editions imo, and it's only every four years. So I'm going with Rio.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

Olympics is much bigger than WCRR.

 

[DFA123]

I'd go with Rio. Generally Worlds is above Olympics, but on these courses, with the respective challengers for each, the Olympics edges it. I'd probably value even San Sebastian over the Worlds this season though.

 

[Bardamu]

Rio.

 

[CheckMyPecs]

Let me put it this way: Do-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA.

 

[Cannibal72]

Rio, which is a shame.
Road cycling's place in the Olympic Games is a little confusing to me. It's one of not that many sports which aren't defined by the Olympics (tennis, football etc) but are in them anyway; equally, it's much more of a niche sport than tennis or football, so this is some of the biggest publicity cycling gets all year. I'm happy to see it there, but I think that from the point of view of cycling's history, it's important not to take it too seriously. For the Olympics to be more important than an honorary Monument is not good. The Olympics are a diversionary sideshow; they cannot be more important than the WCRR, which is an integral part of cycling's history. A lot of sports which are dominated by the Olympics have severe trouble attracting interest in odd-numbered years, which is a fate cycling would do well to avoid.
Unfortunately, the UCI has chosen to legitimise a brutal and oppressive regime; to send riders to a 257km race in absurd and extreme conditions; to distort the calendar; and, least importantly of all but still pretty significantly, to pervert cycling with this nonsense of a course. Why? For a cheap buck. The worst thing about it is the way they dress up that sordid money-grabbing as some kind of commendable widening of the reach of the sport. Every time I see the advert for it declaiming 'the first world championships in the Middle East', it makes me want to throw up. Yes, of course it's the first WC in the Middle East, but that doesn't automatically make everything all right. It is an artificial globalisation - made all the more jarring by the fact that, in Eritrea, Colombia, Malaysia, and other countries with less oil money there are genuine cycling booms, with not a whole lot of help from the UCI. (Incidentally, Colombia bid to host this race.) I expect attendance to be desultory, interest to be low - and this from an event which has the potential to be genuinely inspiring, to new generations of fans. So who's it for? Not for the migrant labourers kept in conditions not fit for animals and institutionally exploited; not even for the Western expats who'll line the roadside - a bit. It's for Qatar, and there's nothing special about cycling. They're just trying to milk every sport they can find for as much positive publicity as they can muster. It's just a shame the UCI has decided to make cycling fans pay the price.

 

[Gigs_98]

The problem about doha is that they didn't even try to make an interesting course. They could have put it in the dessert for crosswinds or could have built some climbs, iirc they even wanted to do that. But now this is a course which makes Kopenhagen look like a high mountain stage. And yeah @cannibal72 I also hate this advert. I don't care if this is the first wc in the middle east, I want to see excitment, crowds and all the stuff that makes cycling famous and a bunch sprint as a wc surely isn't. I'm extremely looking forward to rio but couldn't care less about doha. Hopefully someone will pull a cancellara although I doubt it since basically every team has a sprinter.

 

[hrotha]

WC > OR, but Rio > Doha.

 

[Maaaaaaaarten]

As several people have said, normally I'd pick the World Championship over the Olympics, but in this particular instance, Rio beats Doha.

 

[Pantani_lives]

They're equally important, but I look forward more to Rio. Doha will probably just be a bunch sprint, while Rio has a hilly course without MTF, which will lead to a race that's both tactical and challenging. Some riders will try to reach the final climb with an advantage. Spain, Italy and U.K. will probably dominate the race.

 

[Pantani_lives]

They could have put it in the dessert for crosswinds or could have built some climbs.

You mean the desert?

 

[Eyeballs Out]

What is the Doha course like (apart from obviously flat) ?

A quick search suggests some of it on the exposed roads (wind-affected ?), finishing on a circuit (not very wind-affected), maybe with a cobbled section (??)

 

[Red Rick]

As Olympics are the ONLY huge race with small, smaller, and tiny teams and as they're once every 4 years, I've always though OG to be bigger than a WC. But I accept that that is preferential, but in this case it's even bigger.

Also, poll works now

 

[Red Rick]

They could have put it in the dessert for crosswinds or could have built some climbs.

You mean the desert?

Let them race in pudding, would create more excitement

 

[BigMac]

Re:

Rio, which is a shame.
Road cycling's place in the Olympic Games is a little confusing to me. It's one of not that many sports which aren't defined by the Olympics (tennis, football etc) but are in them anyway; equally, it's much more of a niche sport than tennis or football, so this is some of the biggest publicity cycling gets all year. I'm happy to see it there, but I think that from the point of view of cycling's history, it's important not to take it too seriously. For the Olympics to be more important than an honorary Monument is not good. The Olympics are a diversionary sideshow; they cannot be more important than the WCRR, which is an integral part of cycling's history. A lot of sports which are dominated by the Olympics have severe trouble attracting interest in odd-numbered years, which is a fate cycling would do well to avoid.
Unfortunately, the UCI has chosen to legitimise a brutal and oppressive regime; to send riders to a 257km race in absurd and extreme conditions; to distort the calendar; and, least importantly of all but still pretty significantly, to pervert cycling with this nonsense of a course. Why? For a cheap buck. The worst thing about it is the way they dress up that sordid money-grabbing as some kind of commendable widening of the reach of the sport. Every time I see the advert for it declaiming 'the first world championships in the Middle East', it makes me want to throw up. Yes, of course it's the first WC in the Middle East, but that doesn't automatically make everything all right. It is an artificial globalisation - made all the more jarring by the fact that, in Eritrea, Colombia, Malaysia, and other countries with less oil money there are genuine cycling booms, with not a whole lot of help from the UCI. (Incidentally, Colombia bid to host this race.) I expect attendance to be desultory, interest to be low - and this from an event which has the potential to be genuinely inspiring, to new generations of fans. So who's it for? Not for the migrant labourers kept in conditions not fit for animals and institutionally exploited; not even for the Western expats who'll line the roadside - a bit. It's for Qatar, and there's nothing special about cycling. They're just trying to milk every sport they can find for as much positive publicity as they can muster. It's just a shame the UCI has decided to make cycling fans pay the price.

Good post.

To hell with globalisation. To hell with these WC.

As hrotha put it, WC > OG but Rio > Doha.

 

[jsem94]

The Olympic road race continues to grow in prestige. It's almost as big as the WC now for me, and will probably eclipse it. Ever since professionals were allowed to enter it has grown in prestige. Doha is a disgrace though, much like Copenhagen it will be quickly forgotten (though Doha is a hell of a lot worse).

 

[Gigs_98]

They could have put it in the dessert for crosswinds or could have built some climbs.

You mean the desert?

I think both would be better

 

[loge1884]

Re: Re:

....

Good post.

To hell with globalisation. To hell with these WC.

As hrotha put it, WC > OG but Rio > Doha.

agree 100% with both ... going the Bernie Ecclestone way in terms of globalisation could prove desastrous to cycling ... unlike Formula One cycling roots in blue collar and therefore only works if masses of spectators are willing to be waiting for hours or even days just for the few seconds it takes the peleton to pass by ... accordingly, World Tour events in countries with no (competition)cycling tradition like China obviously didn't work .... I also agree countries like Australia, Britain, Colombia, USA and even more recent Eritrea or South Africa with a short, but grassroot based cycling tradition would be a far better choice for World's than e.g. Middle East ....

 

[SKSemtex]

What a stupid question.
Who cares about scheldeprijs? Doha is even less.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re:

WC > OR, but Rio > Doha.

^

With literally a small hill near the end, it would still be a course for the sprinters, while giving the attackers a small chance, making it much more important. But on this course, there's literally 2 guys in the entire world who can win this barring crashes and mechanicals.

Unless there are crosswinds, then this becomes a race

 

[MikeTichondrius]

Easily Rio. Scarcity of opportunities to win it and show off your gold for four years (like Samu's special kit) makes it really special in my book. With a weak WCRR this year it's a no-brainer for anyone but top sprinters (who will most likely win Doha).

 

[El Pistolero]

Rio. Doha is a crit race that will make sure Cav is a two time world champion... A farce.

 

[Jungle Cycle]

If the captains and stars are choosing Rio I think the field makes it interesting, so in this case, Rio by far...

 

[filipepc]

Olimpic games are much more important.