USAPCC Stage 6 - Golden-Denver

[Alpe d'Huez]

Final stage.

In case you haven't seen it, I won't post a spoiler, but I will simply say it's no surprise really there have been so few posts or threads on this race. This was no Coors' Classic.

 

[filipo]

Why do you say that? I didn't watch (or really read) any of the coverage. Was it boring?

I'd guess that's what you mean, since any race Leipheimer wins has got to be a snooze.

 

[patrick767]

Why do you say that? I didn't watch (or really read) any of the coverage. Was it boring?

I'd guess that's what you mean, since any race Leipheimer wins has got to be a snooze.

The leader's jersey changed every day for the first four days. Most of us wanted a true MTF, which was missing, but this was a good race. Leipheimer's win was certainly no snoozer. He took the lead by attacking on a hill at the end of a stage and riding everyone else off his wheel. He lost it the next day on a rainy descent when a 6 man group got away and took 45 seconds over the other contenders. He took it back by riding a great uphill time trial to take his 2nd stage win, beating Vande Velde by less than a second.

The last couple stages were anti-climatic. I'd like to see that change next year. This race was no snoozer though.

Evans rode well but was obviously off his TdF form. The altitude clearly effected some riders more than others. 23 yr old Tejay Van Garderen showed his potential by finishing 3rd and temporarily stealing the leader's jersey from LL.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

No, it was a snoozer with, perhaps, the most boring stages of any stage race ever. Think of the peloton climbing what was little more than false flat for what seemed like hours.

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

No, it was a snoozer with, perhaps, the most boring stages of any stage race ever. Think of the peloton climbing what was little more than false flat for what seemed like hours.

That's a bit of an exaggeration. I admit the lack of a MTF made it less interesting. I also don't understand why it started in the mountains and ended with three sprint stages, but it was far from a snoozer. And that false flat you mentioned took them 3000 feet higher than the Tour.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

From what I watched and followed, it was something between what Patrick and Damiano are saying. If you like stage races like the Eneco Tour, or Tour of Turkey, this would have interested you. Mostly gradual stages, with a few climbs here and there, no MTF, no massive HC climbing stages.

It was said before the races started that the Tour of Utah would be more interesting, and it was. This race I think was for money more than anything else. They went through popular areas, and areas of easy access. They were trying to make sure they didn't make some of the same mistakes the TOC did, and that the race was seen. In that regard, it was a success I guess. For what it potentially could have been if you consider Colorado's topography, culture, and history (Coors' Classic), that's another story.

 

[cyclingPRpro]

Think of this year's race as whetting the appetite of the general public and casual cycling fans of Colorado. Showing them what can happen when big stars come to town. I do believe (and have been told first hand) that they are going to aim for a more difficult parcours next year.

 

[9000ft]

If the real cycling fans/experts here on the CN forum say the race was a horrible boring failure that's good enough for me.

Of course the hundreds of thousands of fans who turned out, rode their bikes to the climbs, cheered and had a great time experiencing a elite level bike race might disagree. (of course they're not true fans and therefore not worthy of an opinion) Not to mention the sponsors who took notice of those fans might disagree.

But the real fans/experts here know better.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

My problem with the race was that, like the Österreichrundfahrt, it felt like it was run in reverse; the challenging, GC-changing stages were at the start, and then you finished off with 2 or 3 stages of very little happening.

9000ft - having fans out in force does not equal great bike racing. There were fans all over the road for the 2009 Tour de France, but that was one of the worst Grand Tours in history. Having the fans at the roadside is a key component in selling the race as a big deal, and looking good on TV - but the majority of viewers don't watch from the roadside, because they can't. The world is a big place. And so they watch on TV, and if the spectacle doesn't excite them they'll stop watching.

This wasn't a terrible race. But it was an alright race, which I found myself struggling to care too much about in the evenings after the Vuelta. Maybe a bit like the 2010 Tour of California, which was overshadowed manifold by the Giro, they will go back to the drawing board, reappraise and come back with a really good route for next year. I certainly hope so. This race has a lot of potential.

It just hasn't lived up to any of it yet.

Oh, and please change the name of it. It's cringeworthy, almost as bad as the Dutch Food Valley Classic or the Scandinavian Race Uppsala.

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

From what I watched and followed, it was something between what Patrick and Damiano are saying. If you like stage races like the Eneco Tour, or Tour of Turkey, this would have interested you. Mostly gradual stages, with a few climbs here and there, no MTF, no massive HC climbing stages.

It was said before the races started that the Tour of Utah would be more interesting, and it was. This race I think was for money more than anything else. They went through popular areas, and areas of easy access. They were trying to make sure they didn't make some of the same mistakes the TOC did, and that the race was seen. In that regard, it was a success I guess. For what it potentially could have been if you consider Colorado's topography, culture, and history (Coors' Classic), that's another story.

That's a fair point, but I think it was more about just making the inaugural race more spectator friendly and accessible to fans and not so much about money. Like cyclingPRpro said above me, they were whetting the appetite of casual fans. I don't think anyone expected this year to be that exciting. If you were expecting the Coors classic straight away, you were drastically overreaching. This year was experimental, and it was successful. I think it exceeded the races realistic expectations given the crowds, participants etc, but it fell short of reaching maximum potential.

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

This race I think was for money more than anything else. They went through popular areas, and areas of easy access. They were trying to make sure they didn't make some of the same mistakes the TOC did, and that the race was seen. In that regard, it was a success I guess. For what it potentially could have been if you consider Colorado's topography, culture, and history (Coors' Classic), that's another story.

That's a fair point, but I think it was more about just making the inaugural race more spectator friendly and accessible to fans and not so much about money. Like cyclingPRpro said above me, they were whetting the appetite of casual fans. I don't think anyone expected this year to be that exciting. If you were expecting the Coors classic straight away, you were drastically overreaching. This year was experimental, and it was successful. I think it exceeded the races realistic expectations given the crowds, participants etc, but it fell short of reaching maximum potential.

My problem with the race was that, like the Österreichrundfahrt, it felt like it was run in reverse; the challenging, GC-changing stages were at the start, and then you finished off with 2 or 3 stages of very little happening.

Oh, and please change the name of it. It's cringeworthy, almost as bad as the Dutch Food Valley Classic or the Scandinavian Race Uppsala.

I totally agree. I wonder if opinions would be different if it were ran differently.

And I kept your comment about the name because it deserved to be quoted.

 

[Deagol]

RE: the name of the race.

It's funny that in a couple of interviews with the racers (Tom D. and Rory Sutherland, I think) they actually referred to the race as "The Tour of Colorado" but Tom D. caught himself and corrected it in his interview after Stage 2. I believe the name "Tour of Colorado" is already taken by some local series of ACA races up around Fort Collins or something like that. IMO, the USA Pro Cycling Challenge should just pay the local owner of that name and re-name the big race as "The Tour of Colorado" because that name just fits and the local series with that name currently is not worthy.

And yes, it has been said by locals and others alike about a billion times, that the course needs improvement. Next year......

We saw Stage 2 & 6 and those were massive crowds out there on Stage 6. What has been said is true, though.. with a stage profile like this, there was no way to unseat Leipheimer.

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

RE: the name of the race.

It's funny that in a couple of interviews with the racers (Tom D. and Rory Sutherland, I think) they actually referred to the race as "The Tour of Colorado" but Tom D. caught himself and corrected it in his interview after Stage 2. I believe the name "Tour of Colorado" is already taken by some local series of ACA races up around Fort Collins or something like that. IMO, the USA Pro Cycling Challenge should just pay the local owner of that name and re-name the big race as "The Tour of Colorado" because that name just fits and the local series with that name currently is not worthy.

I got so sick of referring to it by it's proper name, that I just started saying The/That Colorado race.

 

[9000ft]

My problem with the race was that, like the Österreichrundfahrt, it felt like it was run in reverse; the challenging, GC-changing stages were at the start, and then you finished off with 2 or 3 stages of very little happening.

9000ft - having fans out in force does not equal great bike racing. There were fans all over the road for the 2009 Tour de France, but that was one of the worst Grand Tours in history. Having the fans at the roadside is a key component in selling the race as a big deal, and looking good on TV - but the majority of viewers don't watch from the roadside, because they can't. The world is a big place. And so they watch on TV, and if the spectacle doesn't excite them they'll stop watching.

This wasn't a terrible race. But it was an alright race, which I found myself struggling to care too much about in the evenings after the Vuelta. Maybe a bit like the 2010 Tour of California, which was overshadowed manifold by the Giro, they will go back to the drawing board, reappraise and come back with a really good route for next year. I certainly hope so. This race has a lot of potential.

It just hasn't lived up to any of it yet.

.

I didn't say it was an awesome race from a hard core cycling fans point of view. I've been somewhat underwhelmed by the course also, but I totally understand why they choose what they did and in that context, think they did what they needed to do. It's a first year event with a lot of unknowns - the Coors Classic was 20 years ago and you can only base so much on that experience.

Yes, seeing it on TV is different than seeing it in person, but one step at a time. If they're going to sell the race to sponsors and ensure that it continues another year, let alone grows and prospers they need buy in from the community and a good looking product. Most people who watch on TV have little idea what is going on in a bike race anyway so you have to start with something that is visually appealing and creates the feeling of a spectacle and with the crowds I think they've got a good start on that front. Just catering to the hard core cycling fan who seems to be almost impossible to please anyway isn't going to take you very far with big buck sponsors.

I wasn't expecting too much from the start. I was really impressed with the quality of the field, especially when the race was first announced a lot of folks didn't think we'd have much more than the top US teams, a couple Euro teams with second tier riders with domestic US teams filling the field. Granted, Schleck, Evans, Basso, etc didn't ride this with the intensity of a GT, but I didn't expect them to; just having them in my hometown and riding the same roads that I ride was way above expectations. If the race gains prestige and financial rewards, I'd expect to see harder racing.

So we'll see what the future brings. As anyone who knows Colorado knows, there is some spectacular topography in the state. It wouldn't be hard to come up with dozens of Mtn Stages that would be at least in the ball park of many of the GT stages, but they have to work from a sponsorship point of view. They have to have host towns that want to and can host a stage. Now that some towns have seen what a draw an event like this can be, they will probably be more likely to pull the strings to get the road closures, etc to make better stages happen. remember, for a lot of average citizens, a bike race like this is just a giant pain in the ****.

Personally, I see nothing to gain from being a cycling snob. I'm just glad to see another top level stage race in the US that has great potential.

 

[bigloco]

I live in Golden and mountain biked up Apex to watch them "summit" lookout mountain....they should have made the circuit climb lookout 6 times...that would have been much better than the flat crap in downtown denver.

edit: To 9000ft's post....

I agree, obviously tons of possibilities. With all the ski resorts, there is no shortage of hotels, etc. Would have loved to see a Winter Park ending to a stage...up over berthoud, nice downhill, finish in town.

 

[shalgo]

Vande Velde on his race:

"I had a lot of bridesmaids positions this week and that was kind of hard to swallow."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/usa-pro-cycling-challenge-2-1/stage-6/results

 

[patrick767]

From what I watched and followed, it was something between what Patrick and Damiano are saying. If you like stage races like the Eneco Tour, or Tour of Turkey, this would have interested you. Mostly gradual stages, with a few climbs here and there, no MTF, no massive HC climbing stages.

It was said before the races started that the Tour of Utah would be more interesting, and it was. This race I think was for money more than anything else. They went through popular areas, and areas of easy access. They were trying to make sure they didn't make some of the same mistakes the TOC did, and that the race was seen. In that regard, it was a success I guess. For what it potentially could have been if you consider Colorado's topography, culture, and history (Coors' Classic), that's another story.

Those are all fair points. As you can see in my prior post, I criticized the route too. On the other hand there were some good attacks, the grades though only 3-5% were sometimes at high altitude and it clearly effected some riders. It could have been better, but this race was not easy. The time gaps weren't huge, but there was close to two minutes between first and tenth place and it wasn't all from the time trial. I've seen results for numerous stage races that were much tighter on times because they lacked challenging stages.

I agree with others that the last couple stages were boring and that there's enormous potential with the Colorado topography to make an epic race. This race was very good for cycling in the US though, especially given the caliber of the competition that turned out for the race.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Great crowds yesterday.
I'd keep the prologue and this, but completely swap around the rest.
The GC battle needs to build, not won early and defended conservatively.
TJvG saved the race from a total disaster, by attacking "No Balls" on that descent.

 

[Deagol]

A question occured to me about this week-long race: Is two time trials too much for a race of this length ?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

A question occured to me about this week-long race: Is two time trials too much for a race of this length ?

The only other race of this length that I know of with 2 ITTs is the Tour de Romandie. Which tends to have a prologue and a fairly hilly one (bring back the old Lausanne ITT!)

 

[Cobblestoned]

Final stage.

In case you haven't seen it, I won't post a spoiler, but I will simply say it's no surprise really there have been so few posts or threads on this race. This was no Coors' Classic.

Nice move. And very fair to Ben.

I like Americans promoting their races. You are definitely not one of them again, Alpe.

Tissue ?

I pretty much enjoyed this race and especially Ben's support and information. It was very late and hard to stay up for every stage (picked some), but I did sometimes, and many German cyclingfans did also follow and enjoy this race most of the time. Especially the great quality and epic landscape.
If you know how to rate this race realistically, it was far from a dissappointment, upgraded slightly, brought and introduced to the Europeans with nice live-coverage.
Of course you somehow need to be a crazy cyclingfan to stay up for this.
But many did.

In these days, every race still existing and happening is a success for cycling and it's fans.
Some CN-Americans just don't get it and just prefer to regularly bash, boycott and counter-promote their own races on every cost. No surprise here. Agree.

 

[Deagol]

I talked to a co-worker of mine this morning who is a bit older than I am. He was around during the Coors Classic and was even an extra in the movie American Flyers (moto driver). He said he thought the crowds were much much larger this time around. Not only has the population of Colorado grown a ton since that time, but maybe cycling is more mainstream. While just about everyone I talk to notes the course could be improved, all acknowledge that this race was a huge success. Most also acknowledge that the TV coverage needs to be improved.
I thank Ben Pounder for putting the time and effort into starting up all but the Stage 6 thread. Perhaps he is out of town or otherwise busy and was not able to make a thread for Stage 6, but that does not mean there was not interest.
Alpe, I can tell you that experiencing this race in person was far above what you would have experienced by watching it on TV- and that is a shame. I know many people were disappointed in the TV coverage since that was their only window on this race, and who can blame them?

 

[im_a_cycle-holic]

Tour de Name-Challenged - lessons from the hype machine

YAWN!

Now let's not mention how many top "contenders" were only here for a week of high-altitude training rides, appearance obligations and sponsor/PR schmoozing. Really.

I raced during the era of the Zinger/Coors and with/against some of those contenders. This 2011 edition was just a little silly fun for the guys... except Tommy who again can't keep the beans down when he gets too excited.

I know when I'm being stroked and listening to Paul do his usual reach-around makes me nauseous.

Sigh and hope if 2012 brings this back it will be with more exciting and intelligent routes. Otherwise just show up for the Ride the Rockiesorass Tour of Colorado "event" rides and experience the thrill for yourself.

 

[9000ft]

YAWN!

Now let's not mention how many top "contenders" were only here for a week of high-altitude training rides, appearance obligations and sponsor/PR schmoozing. Really.

I raced during the era of the Zinger/Coors and with/against some of those contenders. This 2011 edition was just a little silly fun for the guys... except Tommy who again can't keep the beans down when he gets too excited.

I know when I'm being stroked and listening to Paul do his usual reach-around makes me nauseous.

Sigh and hope if 2012 brings this back it will be with more exciting and intelligent routes. Otherwise just show up for the Ride the Rockiesorass Tour of Colorado "event" rides and experience the thrill for yourself.

Thank god the sponsors who make top calibre races possible don't pay much attention to bike snobs.

 

[cyclingPRpro]

YAWN!

Now let's not mention how many top "contenders" were only here for a week of high-altitude training rides, appearance obligations and sponsor/PR schmoozing. Really.

I raced during the era of the Zinger/Coors and with/against some of those contenders. This 2011 edition was just a little silly fun for the guys... except Tommy who again can't keep the beans down when he gets too excited.

I know when I'm being stroked and listening to Paul do his usual reach-around makes me nauseous.

Sigh and hope if 2012 brings this back it will be with more exciting and intelligent routes. Otherwise just show up for the Ride the Rockiesorass Tour of Colorado "event" rides and experience the thrill for yourself.

wow... you must have a lot of friends... What? No? Dude, I am shocked.