Olympic Road Race

[El Pistolero]

For non-cycling fans the bunch sprint would be the most exciting outcome, I've found this from experience over the last three weeks. In a country that doesn't get road-cycling a flat stage is probably the best way to promote it. Of course it would help the promotion if Cav won.

Bull. A lot of people hate cycling because they only know the flat stages.

 

[patterson_hood]

Bull. A lot of people hate cycling because they only know the flat stages.

Everyone I've shown the tour too these past few weeks has only enjoyed the final bunch sprints as they are exciting. Seeing one guy or a small group off the front I was told "is only exciting for the few seconds you see them get away."

A lot of people are indifferent to cycling because they don't understand it. I they won't make the effort to unless their interest is caught. Personally I don't know anyone who "hates" cycling.

 

[El Pistolero]

Everyone I've shown the tour too these past few weeks has only enjoyed the final bunch sprints as they are exciting. Seeing one guy or a small group off the front I was told "is only exciting for the few seconds you see them get away."

A lot of people are indifferent to cycling because they don't understand it. I they won't make the effort to unless their interest is caught. Personally I don't know anyone who "hates" cycling.

Of course Brits find it exciting to see Cav win

Don't worry, next year he'll win 10 stages easily with that crap route.

 

[patterson_hood]

Of course Brits find it exciting to see Cav win

Well yes, of course they would. What point are you trying to make?

 

[King Of The Wolds]

Climbers are more worthy cyclists. Cobbled riders are more worthy cyclists. Puncheurs are more worthy cyclists.

They dont get towed to the line.

They have to think about tactics. They decide when to attack. They dont race the entire course with other riders doing most of the work for them.

What a bizarre argument. Is Kenenisa Bekele a more worthy athlete than Usain Bolt because he has to do more work? How about my dad, who still runs marathons in his 60s? Is he more worthy than Bolt?

Is Novak Djokovic more worthy a sportsman than, say, Lionel Messi, because he works for several hours, rather than 90 minutes.

Let me assure you that to get to the top, in any discipline, in any sport, you need to work almost suicidally hard. And those who get there are equally worthy, in my eyes.

 

[El Pistolero]

Well yes, of course they would. What point are you trying to make?

That if Cav didn't exist, they wouldn't give a **** about those bunch sprint stages.

 

[patterson_hood]

That if Cav didn't exist, they wouldn't give a **** about those bunch sprint stages.

A very big assumption to make. They'd still find it exciting, more so than a lone break-away rider crossing the line after a break none of them saw.

 

[Andy99]

Everyone I've shown the tour too these past few weeks has only enjoyed the final bunch sprints as they are exciting. Seeing one guy or a small group off the front I was told "is only exciting for the few seconds you see them get away."

A lot of people are indifferent to cycling because they don't understand it. I they won't make the effort to unless their interest is caught. Personally I don't know anyone who "hates" cycling.

Exactly. At least when there is a sprint, the excitement builds closer to the finish.

If a solo escapee is up the road and guaranteed to win, well, might as well just turn off the TV..

 

[The Hitch]

What a bizarre argument. Is Kenenisa Bekele a more worthy athlete than Usain Bolt because he has to do more work? How about my dad, who still runs marathons in his 60s? Is he more worthy than Bolt?

Yes. Most definately. I think its a disgrace that Bolt wins "greatest athlete events" because hes the market boy, while Kenenisa whose one of the greatest athletes of all time gets ignored. A shame Team Bolt ended up not agreeing to the 600m race. Would have put him down.

And the key point is that with climbers, and marathon runners, you see the har work live. You see the pain on their faces, pushing themselves to the limit.

Cavs hard work comes before the race. During the race hes working no doubt, but the sprint is often taken within himself. Often has energy left.

Cav put in the hard work before hand no doubt, but in races people often want to see who wants it more on the day. Who is willing to kill themselves for that shot at glory. Not who comes in fastest with the pack.

 

[El Pistolero]

A very big assumption to make. They'd still find it exciting, more so than a lone break-away rider crossing the line after a break none of them saw.

How about the Galibier and Alpe Dhuez

Or Super-Besse? Or the stage Greipel won?

That's how stages should be.

There was never a lone breakaway rider, so don't make stuff up.

 

[Jamsque]

And now we are in to the second part of El P's rhetoric, where it's OK to like cycling for the reasons he likes cycling but it isn't OK to like cycling for any other reason.

All fans are legitimate fans. There are no good reasons for supporting any rider/team in any sport, only different bad ones.

 

[Jamsque]

I also think that this Olympic course will be raced much, much harder than a lot of you are assuming. It isn't going to be a rolling rest day and then 10km of racing, it's the Olympic goddamn Games. It's going to be an aggressive, fast-paced race, regardless of the route.

 

[El Pistolero]

I also think that this Olympic course will be raced much, much harder than a lot of you are assuming. It isn't going to be a rolling rest day and then 10km of racing, it's the Olympic goddamn Games. It's going to be an aggressive, fast-paced race, regardless of the route.

You mean like Zolder?

Nice story bro.

 

[patterson_hood]

How about the Galibier and Alpe Dhuez

Or Super-Besse? Or the stage Greipel won?

That's how stages should be.

There was never a lone breakaway rider, so don't make stuff up.

Nope, they got bored with almost all of those stages, except Aurillac to Carmaux, which they only found exciting because it ended in a sprint.

And I don't believe I ever said there was a lone breakaway rider that won any tour stage, I only supplied an opposite situation to a bunch sprint to make the point that the sprint is more exciting.

For Me Thors' win in Lourdes was my favourite finish in the tour this year, to the non-cycling fans I watched it with it was boring.

 

[El Pistolero]

Nope, they got bored with almost all of those stages, except Aurillac to Carmaux, which they only found exciting because it ended in a sprint.

And I don't believe I ever said there was a lone breakaway rider that won any tour stage, I only supplied an opposite situation to a bunch sprint to make the point that the sprint is more exciting.

For Me Thors' win in Lourdes was my favourite finish in the tour this year, to the non-cycling fans I watched it with it was boring.

Because they're Brits and only care when there would be a Brit in it. It's with all non cycling fans that watch the Tour. A Belgian who doesn't like cycling yet watches the Tour will only find it exciting if a Belgian features. I'm sorry, but I would never use those people as an argument. Number of people watching a stage on TV don't lie: mountain stages are most watched and get the most people along the road.

 

[Mambo95]

You mean like Zolder?

Nice story bro.

There's a big difference between ten man teams and five man teams.

Your problem is that you lack tactical imagination. You see a parcours and you immediately pigeonhole it. You just see a flat stage and can only think of one way it can turn out.

 

[patterson_hood]

And now we are in to the second part of El P's rhetoric, where it's OK to like cycling for the reasons he likes cycling but it isn't OK to like cycling for any other reason.

All fans are legitimate fans. There are no good reasons for supporting any rider/team in any sport, only different bad ones.

One of the reasons I don't really support anyone, I just like to see the best rider win. Even when it comes to football I find it hard to understand why someone would pay to watch Arbroath play when they could watch a team like Arsenal on tv.

I also think that this Olympic course will be raced much, much harder than a lot of you are assuming. It isn't going to be a rolling rest day and then 10km of racing, it's the Olympic goddamn Games. It's going to be an aggressive, fast-paced race, regardless of the route.

I agree with this, if someone decides to go during the box-hill circuits they could easily build up a lead. But if USA, GB, Germany etc. end up working together/against a break I think it will end in a sprint.

 

[Mambo95]

mountain stages are most watched and get the most people along the road.

They get more people along the road because the cyclists go slower and are more spread out. You never see anyone on the descents do you.

 

[patterson_hood]

Because they're Brits and only care when there would be a Brit in it. It's with all non cycling fans that watch the Tour. A Belgian who doesn't like cycling yet watches the Tour will only find it exciting if a Belgian features. I'm sorry, but I would never use those people as an argument. Number of people watching a stage on TV don't lie: mountain stages are most watched and get the most people along the road.

Again, massive generalisation. They weren't excited about any Brits involved (they're Scottish and most don't want to be British anyway) they just found the bunch sprint more exciting. When I first got into cycling there were pretty much no brits to speak of, didn't stop me getting excited about a Super Mario sprint.

 

[El Pistolero]

There's a big difference between ten man teams and five man teams.

Your problem is that you lack tactical imagination. You see a parcours and you immediately pigeonhole it. You just see a flat stage and can only think of one way it can turn out.

Dude, there are 9 man teams out there at the Worlds. What are you talking about?

Yes, a flat stage will 99.9% end up in a bunch sprint. It's a lesson we sadly all learned since 2008.

 

[L'arriviste]

Surely we all just want to see a five- to six-hour race of 250+km unfold in a consistently interesting way. Gradients and parcours and team sizes are factors in that but I think we all want the same thing. It's not even about this or that rider winning. We want suspense, drama and a great physical display and we want it to last more than 2km.

Personally I couldn't care less whether or not the Olympic RR ends in a bunch sprint, but surely nobody among you grumblers (of any nationality) wants to see a race that can be summed up in a sub one-minute YouTube clip simply because what came before was forgettable.

 

[El Pistolero]

Surely we all just want to see a five- to six-hour race of 250+km unfold in a consistently interesting way. Gradients and parcours and team sizes are factors in that but I think we all want the same thing. It's not even about this or that rider winning. We want suspense, drama and a great physical display and we want it to last more than 2km.

Personally I couldn't care less whether or not the Olympic RR ends in a bunch sprint, but surely nobody among you grumblers (of any nationality) wants to see a race that can be summed up in a sub one-minute YouTube clip simply because what came before was forgettable.

Apparently they do.

 

[FreeWheelin]

How about the Galibier and Alpe Dhuez

Or Super-Besse? Or the stage Greipel won?

That's how stages should be.

There was never a lone breakaway rider, so don't make stuff up.

They were exciting because of what was happening BEHIND the lone breakaway. It was part of a biger picture. It is great to win a tour stage but in terms of GC it did not mean anything. Whereas I the olympics you cross first you have gold.

IMO watching 30 or so people scrable for the line is more exciting then watching a lone breakaway 5mins up the road.

 

[Mambo95]

Dude, there are 9 man teams out there at the Worlds. What are you talking about?

You were making a comparison to Zolder which was in 2002, not this year. There weren't nine man teams back then. In fact I was mistaken and it was actually twelve man teams, not ten. Big, big difference to five man teams.

Count the Italians yourself: http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/road/2002/worlds02/?id=emr

 

[El Pistolero]

You were making a comparison to Zolder which was in 2002, not this year. There weren't nine man teams back then. In fact I was mistaken and it was actually twelve man teams, not ten. Big, big difference to five man teams.

Count the Italians yourself: http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/road/2002/worlds02/?id=emr

There are bigger teams than 5 man teams

Both Germany and Australia will want the race to end in a sprint. 2 teams is more than enough to kill all the suspense. Unless the course is somehow more difficult then said and unless the weather is bad it will end up in a mass sprint. I don't know who will win that one, but it makes it pointless to watch except the last 5-10km.