Hammer Series

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
The event itself is small thing and I'm pretty sure it won't work. Yet as Libs put it it will be in competition with a few races such as the Tour of Luxembourg or the ZLN which might disappear because of it (pretty confident it won't). That's a case of either-or.

However it's the way advocates defend it that revolts me. The rationale! Not the thing itself.
 
Does cycling really need a shot in the arm?

It is a lot more popular now than it was 10 or 20 years ago here in Ireland.

They do need to make some significant changes to cycling. But nothing radical like this.

T20 was a radical change to cricket. But it is kind of sh!t.
 
May 24, 2015
92
0
0
Re:

barmaher said:
T20 was a radical change to cricket. But it is kind of ****.
T20 was a radical change, and whilst I still like the longer versions of the game (5 day and 50 over cricket) the local domestic comp has gone bananas for T20. You might get a few thousand people if you are lucky for South Australia v Victoria 4 day game over a weekend but you can get 45 - 50 thousand into Adelaide Oval for a T20 match on a week night.
 
Alexandre B. said:
Gigs_98 said:
Alexandre B. said:
myrideissteelerthanyours said:
Gigs_98 said:
If someone really wants to get rich from organizing bike event they should make fake cycling races with heels and heros just like wrastlin' in 'murica. WWE had 11% revenue 14% increase in paid subscribers last year.
What? You joking? :lol:
There were maybe 1 or 2 complaints after the course change and dozens after the wrong nationality won. This pattern holds true for all single day and GT races you can find the SAME PERSON who believe GTs have too much or too little TT and it's all based on the relative form of their favorite contender. When AC was competitive everyone here INSISTED that saving the difficult climb till the very finish of a GT stage was the greatest invention EVER.
They whined because the podium supposedly wasn't good enough for them, despite a Paris-Nice stage winner (Démare), a former podium finisher (Swift) and a podium finisher at Flanders (Roelandts).
Have you ever considered the possibility that people whined because the race was extremely boring?
That's what I read somewhere on Italian media after the race. They questioned the race difficulty because of the podium, a podium that wasn't "elite" according to that Italian media.[/quote]
lol, did they really talk bout 'elite' podium? What a load of pretentious idiots. Also, wasn't one of the main reasons it wasn't an 'elite' podium was because there was a crash in the final few hundred metres which obstructed many of the favourites? Otherwise its possible there may have been Kristoff, Bouhanni, Sagan, Gaviria and GVA filling out the top 5.
 
I am confused - The same people who blast the 'Hammer Series' concept as taking away from the beauty of cycling, at the same time, post incessantly that current modern cycling is boring and devoid of any excitement - Why one is it ?

Realistically can only see four or five gaps for the 'Hammer Series' - Beginning of FEB, Jun, Aug and before or after the World's - Doubt you can find anymore gaps.
 
Re: Re:

Tim B said:
barmaher said:
T20 was a radical change to cricket. But it is kind of ****.
T20 was a radical change, and whilst I still like the longer versions of the game (5 day and 50 over cricket) the local domestic comp has gone bananas for T20. You might get a few thousand people if you are lucky for South Australia v Victoria 4 day game over a weekend but you can get 45 - 50 thousand into Adelaide Oval for a T20 match on a week night.
T20 is still rubbish though.

Lots of people want to see U2 play. Doesn't mean they are any good.

And I don't think cycling is dying in the same way that interstate 4day cricket is.
 
Re:

yaco said:
I am confused - The same people who blast the 'Hammer Series' concept as taking away from the beauty of cycling, at the same time, post incessantly that current modern cycling is boring and devoid of any excitement - Why one is it ?
On the contrary, it's getting too much oriented towards excitement and suspense and less towards epicness. Youngsters now would rather like seeing thrillers ending in a bunch sprint rather than epic soloes like Wellens' victory at the Tour of Poland which they would disqualify as boring. It's the way it is. Video Game generation! They cannot appreciate it when a great champion like Julien Absalon collapses at the 2008 World Championship because they like seeing super heroes who never show any signs of weakness. Mug era! By the way, cross-country mountainbike or marathon mountainbike, that was a great novelty from the nineties which has its place in the cycling agenda. Hammers, no.
 
Re:

yaco said:
I am confused - The same people who blast the 'Hammer Series' concept as taking away from the beauty of cycling, at the same time, post incessantly that current modern cycling is boring and devoid of any excitement - Why one is it ?
The problem is not with the game but with the way it is played. And cycling is in the position that, absolutely because of the point-to-point method that this is designed to move us away from (so that they can charge you to watch), it actually can react to that by adjusting the courses it sets to prevent stifling techniques being successful.

The success of the offside trap and Italian defences playing true catenaccio may lead to dull football, but that doesn't mean that football itself is the problem, or that we should have 20 minute matches with super-sized goals, goalkeepers wearing blindfolds, "fouls allowed zones" and a half-size sloping pitch riddled with obstacles in the name of increasing the spectacle.
 
May 24, 2015
92
0
0
Re: Re:

barmaher said:
Tim B said:
barmaher said:
T20 was a radical change to cricket. But it is kind of ****.
T20 was a radical change, and whilst I still like the longer versions of the game (5 day and 50 over cricket) the local domestic comp has gone bananas for T20. You might get a few thousand people if you are lucky for South Australia v Victoria 4 day game over a weekend but you can get 45 - 50 thousand into Adelaide Oval for a T20 match on a week night.
Lots of people want to see U2 play. Doesn't mean they are any good.
Well that's true, I do like U2 (their older stuff) and I've seen them in concert, and it wasn't great.
 
Re: Re:

GenericBoonenFan said:
Maaaaaaaarten said:
GenericBoonenFan said:
A sport like cycling is now still the same like 100 years ago (with some minor changes)
If only that were true!
It's still riding from A to B over a fixed route.
And that's the problem, cycling is not dynamic enough, too conservative.
You have seen that teams fail to attract to sponsorship and that's because other sports reach out to a broader public. Change is simply needed. And yes I myself think that the hole TTT-stage is stupid but atleast teams are trying something. They don't want to see their sport die out.
I don't think many popular sports have dramatically changed how they work in order to become more popular. Football is still ninety minutes with eleven players and two goals. Rugby is still eighty minutes with fifteen and two try lines.

Cricket is the only one that has changed, but on an international level there is no doubt which format is most important. On a domestic level (in England) four day matches are still more important. There's the IPL which is pretty exciting but a pure gimmick and isn't really taken seriously outside of India and the Big Bash League which is just sad, as the county circuit in Australia was really good. In youth cricket t20 is really important but that's because nobody wants to play a game that is over 4 hours long and mainly consists of standing in a field or sitting in a pavilion (I play cricket).

We also have to take into account that the more we shorten races for young people, the more they are used to that length and then later on want to make it even shorter. It's what happened in cricket. 5 days became 1 day which became 20 overs. I cannot see it decreasing any more because otherwise it would become completely meaningless, but still. Here in the UK, I know only two or three other people my age (out of say 150) that follow cycling, but that is probably a massive improvement on 20 years ago. If there is one thing Team Sky have done well is raise awareness of cycling in the UK.

Edit: Golf is perhaps the most long winded and boring sport in the world (imo) and hasn't changed much at all over the years (Masters and Opens are still there) yet still attracts a similar audience to what it did many years ago. This will not be the solution to cycling's ailments, because it seems to have completely misdiagnosed them, despite correctly acknowdging the symptoms.
 
Oct 23, 2011
3,846
2
0
Look, cycling from A to B over a fixed route is pretty much the definition of road cycling. Apart from that pretty much everything changed. The bikes got gears, the roads got paved, stage lengths got cut in half basically, being paced by your teammates was allowed etc. Look up some of the routes and histories (and rules!) of pre-war TDFs and tell me cycling didn't change dramatically over the past 100 years.

In 1917 there wasn't a TDF for obvious reasons, but let's say 1919. They had 15 stages, but the total length was more than 2000km more than the 2017 TDF will have (i.e. average stage length of >300km!!). You weren't allowed assistance when you had a mechanical issue. You needed to bring your own food. Teammates weren't allowed to pace you. Roads were mostly unpaved. Bikes didn't have gears. The eventual winner, the Belgian Firmin Lambot, got into the leading GC position on the penultimate 468km stage (not even the longest stage of the race!) from Metz to Dunkerque and ended up winning the GC with a lead of 1 hour and 42 minutes. Average speed was 24km/h and only ten people finished the race! This was all about superhuman endurance. Completely different from cycling nowadays, where it's about the explosive sprint in the end or having the best watt/kg for 30 minutes. Only in races like Paris-Roubaix, or in the occasional all or nothing attack from far out in mountain stages do we see cycling that remotely resembles the cycling of 100 years ago, where people actually have to race the entire day instead of drafting in the peloton all day to put in one big effort at the end.
 
Re: Re:

Libertine Seguros said:
yaco said:
I am confused - The same people who blast the 'Hammer Series' concept as taking away from the beauty of cycling, at the same time, post incessantly that current modern cycling is boring and devoid of any excitement - Why one is it ?
The problem is not with the game but with the way it is played. And cycling is in the position that, absolutely because of the point-to-point method that this is designed to move us away from (so that they can charge you to watch), it actually can react to that by adjusting the courses it sets to prevent stifling techniques being successful.

The success of the offside trap and Italian defences playing true catenaccio may lead to dull football, but that doesn't mean that football itself is the problem, or that we should have 20 minute matches with super-sized goals, goalkeepers wearing blindfolds, "fouls allowed zones" and a half-size sloping pitch riddled with obstacles in the name of increasing the spectacle.
Will always be an issue with the evenness of the peleton - You can be creative with routes but the strength of the teams will probably neutralise any benefits - I like the idea of team racing events to achieve an outcome - As I previously posted, Hammer series will only find 4 to 5 slots in the calendar per season - I liken it to the post TDF criterions which never raises strong resistance.
 
Re: Re:

yaco said:
Libertine Seguros said:
yaco said:
I am confused - The same people who blast the 'Hammer Series' concept as taking away from the beauty of cycling, at the same time, post incessantly that current modern cycling is boring and devoid of any excitement - Why one is it ?
The problem is not with the game but with the way it is played. And cycling is in the position that, absolutely because of the point-to-point method that this is designed to move us away from (so that they can charge you to watch), it actually can react to that by adjusting the courses it sets to prevent stifling techniques being successful.

The success of the offside trap and Italian defences playing true catenaccio may lead to dull football, but that doesn't mean that football itself is the problem, or that we should have 20 minute matches with super-sized goals, goalkeepers wearing blindfolds, "fouls allowed zones" and a half-size sloping pitch riddled with obstacles in the name of increasing the spectacle.
Will always be an issue with the evenness of the peleton - You can be creative with routes but the strength of the teams will probably neutralise any benefits - I like the idea of team racing events to achieve an outcome - As I previously posted, Hammer series will only find 4 to 5 slots in the calendar per season - I liken it to the post TDF criterions which never raises strong resistance.
So we will have 2-3 richest teams fighting for the price. :sad:
 
Cycling is too boring and predictable, we need the hammer series to enliven the sport and catch the newer generation. Its all blatantly obvious after having watched this outdated sport for the last 2 weekends - something needs to be done ASAP.
 
Re:

ice&fire said:
Be careful, they might strike back after MSR and the Ardennes :p
True, they might, nay, they will.

We have seen the best racing I can ever remember in the start of the year by some margin. It obviously won't continue, especially when we hit the Ardennes, but still..
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY