Waterloo Sunrise said:
This is a cycling forum. People can and do post about the good and bad of cycling.
This particular race made the mistake of paying quite a bit of money to publicise and have itself televised, and then didn't deliver the goods. It is precisely the sort of thing people will comment on.
More broadly, I'm sure you've experienced frustration before with people who can't accept their children are less beautiful and talented than they think. Everytime a local comes up with a mealy-mouthed post pretending it isn't a bit (i'm being generous) dull, or trying to claim altitude justifies a boring route, it just encourages people to want to put the boot in.
The point is that the thread is being hijacked. I think everyone has said the coverage (TV & internet) sucks and I could not agree more. Also, it sucks that we are stuck with Phil & Paul. But this thread in particular, the complaints have not really been all about the admittedly lousy coverage, but have focused on one thing: gradient….. and talk about beating a dead horse. The mention of altitude by posters here (I can't speak on behalf of the commercials, since I don't watch them) has been brought up as a counterpoint to the lack of steep gradient, not as some incendiary or “Mealy-mouthed” comment. No one here has said anything ridiculous as what the promoters may have said (i.e. “this is as good as the Tour”, etc..) I have not heard anything like that directly, but if it was said, then it is embarrassing, to say the least (not for the posters here, but for the marketing tool who actually wrote/said it).
So, here are things we agree on, as far as I can tell:
1) The route could be better (locals have been saying this right from when the route was first announced)
2) The climbs are not as steep as Europe. This is the point where altitude is brought-in as a balancing factor
3) Phil & Paul & Bob are idiots (Ok, that may be bit harsh to some and not harsh enough for others, but that is my opinion, and I have met Bob Roll)
4) The coverage totally sucks. No possible disagreement here. I might argue that we need to separate the coverage from the actual race, but for us fans, one does not exist without the other, so we are screwed.
5) The promoters are too cocky. From the small bit of advertising, I would have to agree. Maybe it’s a result of the monster-truck mentality in this country?
6) It is a new race, problems will need to be worked-out and things (route, coverage) should improve in the future.
7) This race is not on the same level as the TDF, Giro, or Vuelta, or several other long-running races (this one should be a no brainer, but see #5 above). On this one, I think what they are saying is to hype the race to US fans who never heard of any of those races. They focus on the uninformed (about cycling) public and assume no familiarity with the sport on their part (which is a mistake IMO).
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram