How do you watch cycling?

[Samu Cuenca]

Please list just one entertaining moment from some obscure XC skiing race... no wait, you can't.

Lol, of course LS out of all people could do that. She'd even be able to tell you details from a random wrestling match in East Germany 50 years ago.

 

[RedheadDane]

Lol, of course LS out of all people could do that. She'd even be able to tell you details from a random wrestling match in East Germany 50 years ago.

Key word being "entertaining".

 

[Samu Cuenca]

Key word being "entertaining".

The key words being entertaining to you, which it obviously wouldn't be, because the race wouldn't be happening live.

 

[RedheadDane]

The key words being entertaining to you, which it obviously wouldn't be, because the race wouldn't be happening live.

And because it would be some boring sport.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I never said that. Like I said; some films are cycling.

And how do you figure out which films are going to be entertaining to you?

 

[RedheadDane]

And how do you figure out which films are going to be entertaining to you?

By considering the genre.
Just like I do when watching sport:
If the "genre" is cycling, I'm likely to find it entertaining.
If the "genre" is XC skiing, I'm not going to find it entertaining.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

And because it would be some boring sport.

The most entertaining races will in many ways play out similar to a good bike race. And at their worst, they will be a lot like the races where Pogačar has won by minutes, which you've had no problem watching.

Anyway, the point is, you should just watch biathlon instead.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

By considering the genre.
Just like I do when watching sport:
If the "genre" is cycling, I'm likely to find it entertaining.
If the "genre" is XC skiing, I'm not going to find it entertaining.

So what you're saying is, you find out about a film, find out what type of film it is, take into account a predilection for what you find entertaining, and then decide whether or not it's likely to entertain you.

That's the precise reason why I look at the race parcours and, once available, startlists before I make plans around watching it, rather than just turning coverage on blindly. Because it means I can find out what type of cycling race it is, take into account my personal preferences for what I find entertaining, and decide whether or not it's likely to entertain me.

 

[RedheadDane]

So what you're saying is, you find out about a film, find out what type of film it is, take into account a predilection for what you find entertaining, and then decide whether or not it's likely to entertain you.

And if the race (film) is cycling, I'm likely to be entertained.
Also... what difference does the startlist do? If the route is likely to make you entertained, the riders present ain't gonna matter.

Anyway, the point is, you should just watch biathlon instead.

At least that involves guns.
Still not something I'd ever actively decide to watch.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

And if the race (film) is cycling, I'm likely to be entertained.
Also... what difference does the startlist do? If the route is likely to make you entertained, the riders present ain't gonna matter.



At least that involves guns.
Still not something I'd ever actively decide to watch.

You don't find some cycle races more entertaining than others?

As for the startlist, if there are riders I am particularly interested in the development of, or who are likely to add to the entertainment factor of a race, then I am more likely to tune in. If there is an overpowered team or dominant star who is likely to make mincemeat of the opposition and make the spectacle dour and predictable, then I'm less likely to tune in.

If it's 2016-19 and Peter Sagan is on the startlist, I choose not to watch live in order to stop myself losing my temper and getting into arguments. Because contrary to how it may sometimes seem, I don't actually like being angry.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

At least that involves guns.
Still not something I'd ever actively decide to watch.

You know the old saying; a gun is just an oblong shot put shot.

 

[RedheadDane]

You don't find some cycle races more entertaining than others?

Yes, but I have to watch them before I can know whether I was entertained.
However, odds of me being entertained are in fact quite big.

 

[Valv.Piti]

What the hell is this discussion? Just came back and reading through this man, its tough...

I watch on Max and TV2 when the broadcast the races. Most cycling I watch is usually live, Im quite bad at watching a rerun of a race that I would really like to watch as that means trying actively not spoil it during a day and what not. And I usually arrange my life so that it means that races I really like to watch, I watch live (classics and big GT stages). I use LFR breakdowns for lots of smaller stuff that i didnt get to catch/not that interested in watching live anyways

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Yes, but I have to watch them before I can know whether I was entertained.
However, odds of me being entertained are in fact quite big.

Out of interest, how much XC skiing did you watch before you decided it was a boring sport that you would never be entertained by?

 

[RedheadDane]

Out of interest, how much XC skiing did you watch before you decided it was a boring sport that you would never be entertained by?

Once again you refuse to get it...
I started watching a bit of cycling, and realised that I was very likely to be entertained by it.
I don't need to have watched XC skiing to know I'm not gonna be entertained by it.

 

[kingjr]

The best way to watch any sport is obviously the one that allows you to skip the boring bits. Unless it's a really big event, in which case it's worth watching the whole thing, to get yourself in the mood. The great thing about cycling is, with a bit of experience, you can easily predict when it gets interesting.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Once again you refuse to get it...
I started watching a bit of cycling, and realised that I was very likely to be entertained by it.
I don't need to have watched XC skiing to know I'm not gonna be entertained by it.

So you haven't actually watched any, but proclaim it boring, while also criticising others for skipping the parts of cycling they consider boring after two decades plus of watching the sport and learning what they enjoy and don't enjoy about it? I'd like to think I've now watched enough cycling to be able to judge when I think a race is not going to be to my taste and choose my viewing around that.

I mean, my point was going to be that if you watched a race and it was a boring race, I'd get that, but then if the first race I'd watched was the Danish Tour de France Grand Départ, broadcast in full from kilometre zero... I probably wouldn't have been watching by the time the sprint happened, let alone 20 years down the line. Thankfully, though, that wasn't the first racing I saw, I saw shorter broadcasts (back then, almost all races only got the last 60-90 minutes broadcast) of more interesting stages where more happened, and became interested enough to watch more, until I started to understand the nuances of the sport, became familiar with names and teams. I just don't think that would have happened watching something like stage 5 of the 2020 Tour, where there wasn't even a breakaway, just a group ride, but it was broadcast start to finish. But I did not watch that stage start to finish to be bored by it, because after so many years of watching cycling, I took a look at the course, checked the live ticker, went and did something else, and then tuned in near the end.

So I don't see what exactly I'm "refusing to get", other than your insistence that other cycling fans are not allowed to consider some parts of the sport boring, while simultaneously criticising others for enjoying a sport that you've devoted precisely zero time to understanding.

On the other hand, what I very much don't get is you pushing the argument that we shouldn't check the parcours or the startlist, just switch on when the broadcast starts... while simultaneously criticising me posting about races like the Clásico RCN and the HTV Cup in the Lesser Known Race Results thread. After all, if the parcours and the startlist are irrelevant and you just need to know it's cycling to be entertained it... then surely you are tuning in as soon as Vietnamese TV goes live?

 

[YavorD]

The best way to watch any sport is obviously the one that allows you to skip the boring bits. Unless it's a really big event, in which case it's worth watching the whole thing, to get yourself in the mood. The great thing about cycling is, with a bit of experience, you can easily predict when it gets interesting.

Turning on an hour or 2 after the coverage started, but still watching from the beginning, allows me to skip all the adds and uninteresting/boring interview without missing a minute of racing.

But according to RhD I wouldn't have watched the race then as it's not live. So maybe I don't watch anything?

 

[RedheadDane]

Turning on an hour or 2 after the coverage started, but still watching from the beginning, allows me to skip all the adds and uninteresting/boring interview without missing a minute of racing.

Add free streaming.

 

[YavorD]

Add free streaming.

My way of watching isn't add free. And I'm certainly not paying the extra needed for that.

Suppose that if I get a phone call/prepare a food (because, you know, 6 hours) during a race and I pause it, once after I restart should jump straight to live because otherwise I wouldn't watch the race?

Edit: Also, you do realise that occasionally your stream may be behind (sometimes up to a minute), right? Therefore you could watch some races after they happened. Does that mean you classify these races as "unwatched"?

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

It's not necessarily about watching "all that there is" but "all that you need to catch"
....

Hell, the CN forum is quite helpful for this, if there aren't many posts in a thread for the race that day, the chances are nothing of great value or interest happened, but if the thread has swollen hugely in the number of posts, the chances are something worth checking out happened.

The only url that has a permanent place on my desktop is the shortcut to @HowFarOut on TwitteX. If I am at home for much of the duration of a race, that's grand, if not, that is a spoiler free way of finding out what I will want to see.

 

[pastronef]

when I worked at the hotel I tried to have my shifts so that I could watch some stages and races. I missed Froome's amazing Finestre stage cause I didn't check the Giro stage list. it was mostly in summer for the TDF, having night shifts or morning shifts for the main stages.
but I missed a lot anyway.
I went to a concert in Tuscany and in the afternoon I got ahold of the remote control in a bar on the square and watched Schleck win on Alpe in 2006. I watched 2006 Liege's last km in a bar in Parma, Worlds 2009 in my gf's student house in Cannes, 1998 San Sebastian in a bar near Montpellier, I watched Vino's Olympic in a room at the hotel I worked, same as a few Roubaix, and Fleche 2010 etc etc
now I can watch live at work or later or the day after, with Discovery (I avoid twitter and the web and tell family I don't know who won so stfu )

 

[RedheadDane]

@Libertine Seguros
BTW, here's why I know XC skiing is boring;
I've done it. It's horrible.
Why would I want to watch other people do it?

 

[YavorD]

It is kinda strange to realise that a bunch of people on a cycling forum don't actually like watching cycling...

They do like. They just watch in a way different from yours.
And given that a lot of people wouldn't mind watching it after it happened (for various reasons) as I said you're the actual exception, not the rule about how cycling should be watched.

And to tell me I didn't watch a race because I didn't watch it live....

 

[Netserk]

For those whom it displeases a lot to get stuck in the Viking Vortex, I recommend they deliberately avoid it (after a response or two). Otherwise, you'll be stuck for as long as you engage.