I am enough of a student of discourse that I cannot help but notice the striking use across social media, including this forum, of the concept of "gift" and "gifting" with regard to this Vuelta. The issue is, in essence, what defines or determines "a gift" in WT cycling?
A number of posts argue that GC Kiss is "not the strongest" in the bunch. Setting aside the lack of empirical evidence in this race (team orders, tactical considerations, etc have muddied those waters), since when has "the strongest" automatically won bike races? All serious fans know the answer is, Never. So a Kiss victory on that score alone doesn't meet the standard understanding of "gift."
Now, let's consider the help he has undoubtedly gotten from his two superstar teammates (Full disclosure, I am a big Rogla fan and wanted him to get Vuelta #4).Again, serious fans will have lost count of the times a "leader" has been rescued by the selfless actions of the team. I seem to recall Roglic being saved by WvA in a certain prominent stage race not that long ago. Was that a "gift'?
What about 'team orders' to protect a given rider's leading position/jersey? For example, a "stronger" rider is sent up the road for mountain or sprint points in order to keep them from other squads and protect his teammate's standing in the green or polkadot competition? Is that a gift?
I am not suggesting that this Vuelta has not been a bit of a clusterf%$#, with the competitive racing often overshadowed by intramural rivalries, poor team management, including squad selection and dynamics, and opposition too weak to break the Jumbo stranglehold -- on top of the usual Vuelta chaos.
But to lay it off as unseemly '"gifting" just because many of us are unhappy with the last few days of racing seems shortsighted. In other words, much of what has happened in this Vuelta is not that unusual in cycling. What is rare, and I hope unlikely to be repeated, is the concentrated perfect storm of the contradictions inherent to the individual-in-a-team sport that is modern cycling.
A number of posts argue that GC Kiss is "not the strongest" in the bunch. Setting aside the lack of empirical evidence in this race (team orders, tactical considerations, etc have muddied those waters), since when has "the strongest" automatically won bike races? All serious fans know the answer is, Never. So a Kiss victory on that score alone doesn't meet the standard understanding of "gift."
Now, let's consider the help he has undoubtedly gotten from his two superstar teammates (Full disclosure, I am a big Rogla fan and wanted him to get Vuelta #4).Again, serious fans will have lost count of the times a "leader" has been rescued by the selfless actions of the team. I seem to recall Roglic being saved by WvA in a certain prominent stage race not that long ago. Was that a "gift'?
What about 'team orders' to protect a given rider's leading position/jersey? For example, a "stronger" rider is sent up the road for mountain or sprint points in order to keep them from other squads and protect his teammate's standing in the green or polkadot competition? Is that a gift?
I am not suggesting that this Vuelta has not been a bit of a clusterf%$#, with the competitive racing often overshadowed by intramural rivalries, poor team management, including squad selection and dynamics, and opposition too weak to break the Jumbo stranglehold -- on top of the usual Vuelta chaos.
But to lay it off as unseemly '"gifting" just because many of us are unhappy with the last few days of racing seems shortsighted. In other words, much of what has happened in this Vuelta is not that unusual in cycling. What is rare, and I hope unlikely to be repeated, is the concentrated perfect storm of the contradictions inherent to the individual-in-a-team sport that is modern cycling.