Even so. In the final instance the hills are relatively short and since mass starts are typically raced on tempo intensity at the most, all the top dogs can go full gas anaerobically if someone decides to attack. At least it has seemed that way for a long time - no real (= sustainable, those that encourage attacking) gaps are opened on the hills. The men's stage from Toblach to Val di Fiemme is an exception, the hill is long, but it's then followed by 15k of downhill.
In sum: I dont mind sprint bonuses, but at the moment they are too generous. Didn't Cologna snatch some 4+min yesteryear, and wasn't Bauer the fastest skier without them? I think there's a discrepancy there.
Sure, they up the tempo on the hills and try to rip one another's legs and arms off or rather try to induce sprint-preventing fatigue upon the others, but as a spectator I'm not satisfied with this. It appears too sterile.
So we need hills of longer duration or a longish series of hills raced with the intensity above the threshold. What is missing is the incentive to attack. In cycling there are attacks on the MTFs because after 4hr or so the tops can sustain (about) an hour on the threshold and there is a very real threat of bonking in the finale if one doses the effort wrong.
The Alpe hits this
concept spot on, although I bet no one will bonk on a 9k stage. But nonetheless a better climber can just ski away. However, hitting the concept right is only going half the distance, because I can't decide if I find the Alpe ski-able or not. IMO a 5k hill of half the steepness than the Alpe would in fact be better - gliding skills and technique would then feature even more. Again analogy to MTFs in cycling is apt enough: it is often so that the racing spectacle is best on the lower gradients, when the riders conclude they can actually benefit from attacking and the hill is not about mere surviving.
Also we need longer stages. The men cover what 120k over 11 days, and that's what half an hour per day? I bet they all put in 4hr / day while training. I know I know, the intensity is high, but come on - the tour is supposed to be the cream of the crap.
The skiers buffing up is but a function of this new sprint - or: intensity - driven race system, where power/weight ratio has become less important than before, and pure power / explosivity decides everything.
I think the new system is boring, or at least boredom-inducing, although the ideology behind its implementation is that the old system was boring. Then again I watch the races anyway, so perhaps my complaining is illegit. Also I wholeheartedly accept that my view of good racing might as well stand for boredom to many.
But to illustrate my point, this is how it is to me: Kollen 50k world cup in 2010 was boring although with Vittoz, Northug, Manificat, Piller Cottrer contesting in the fog it could have been Polish scale awesome, because Northug was always going to beat everyone in the sprint. The ladies WC 30k last year was not boring, because there were attacks that eliminated Björgen from doing so. In fact, to me the ladies' 30k was the best sporting event last year, hands down.
Gee, sorry for the rambling.
I think I'll root for Manificat in the overall.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram