Why Grand Tours Suck

[boardhanger]

............they don't actually suck but TV coverage is 20 years to late. Tell me when was the last time that you saw an important attack into 5 hour total TV coverage stage???? When? 1998?? Why air 4 hours of spinning which turnsoff who have obviously lost interest for the finale??? Modern tours don't need 5 hour stages live on TV the riders don't justify it. Flanders....Roubaix now that is exciting racing. Hello pro cyclists? At least try to entertain the viewers with some action outside the last 5KM's.......

 

[skidmark]

............they don't actually suck but TV coverage is 20 years to late. Tell me when was the last time that you saw an important attack into 5 hour total TV coverage stage???? When? 1998??

2006 stage 17.

 

[hrotha]

2006 stage 17.

2010 stage 16.

 

[King Of Molehill]

I enjoyed the old CBS coverage (remember John Tesh?) in the mid-late 80's. They taped a week's worth of the Tour then showed the best highlights from each stage and because of this were able to wrap a lot of it up with good story and tension. Then they would show 'live' coverage from the Sunday stage and then the finale into Paris. I still think Grand Tours are better presented as a well edited movie rather than live. They should bring back that format but maybe not John Tesh ;- )

 

[Ferminal]

2010 stage 16.

Yeh but they should have cut the coverage after the first 2 hours!

 

[karlboss]

Yeh but they should have cut the coverage after the first 2 hours!

I was pretty annoyed, coverage started after the exciting portion on sbs in oz, and I was stuck and work for that, then came home to watch the rest.

If you don't like the first hours of coverage...don't watch. For me it's of interest so I do.

 

[Old School]

I enjoyed the old CBS coverage (remember John Tesh?) in the mid-late 80's. They taped a week's worth of the Tour then showed the best highlights from each stage and because of this were able to wrap a lot of it up with good story and tension. Then they would show 'live' coverage from the Sunday stage and then the finale into Paris. I still think Grand Tours are better presented as a well edited movie rather than live. They should bring back that format but maybe not John Tesh ;- )

+1....watching CBS made you think they CONSTANTLY attacked each other...and the music helped too.

 

[redtreviso]

I enjoyed the old CBS coverage (remember John Tesh?) in the mid-late 80's. They taped a week's worth of the Tour then showed the best highlights from each stage and because of this were able to wrap a lot of it up with good story and tension. Then they would show 'live' coverage from the Sunday stage and then the finale into Paris. I still think Grand Tours are better presented as a well edited movie rather than live. They should bring back that format but maybe not John Tesh ;- )

Best TV segment ever was 1987 Pau-Luz Ardiden..The segment started in slow motion in the fog.. "fear ye who have come to the Pyrenees" or something..I forgot the commentator's name..Some Tesh song was the background..

 

[theswordsman]

I was grateful this year that Eurosport covered certain stages from the start. A lot happens early on, with breaks trying to get away, crashes, climbs, scenery, etc. Remember that it's intended to be a TOUR of a country. Towns pay money to be a part. There's a reason why there are scripts describing castles and monasteries and that the helicopters make sure to circle those areas. People put a lot of time and effort into road art as well. Just as the teams are there to promote their sponsors, the big picture is also to promote tourism, not just for the three weeks of the race, but by showing television viewers great places to visit.

There's a lot more to the event than just the racing. We don't see it, but the caravan itself is like a major parade. The Giro is really proud of theirs, and a lot of people go out to party.

There are highlight shows and videos of the final kilometers if you don't want to see it all. It doesn't that more shouldn't be covered for those of us who want to see it in depth. The Tour Down Under would be a bigger deal internationally if they didn't get us excited for racing and then not show most of the race.

 

[ManInFull]

............they don't actually suck but TV coverage is 20 years to late. Tell me when was the last time that you saw an important attack into 5 hour total TV coverage stage???? When? 1998?? Why air 4 hours of spinning which turnsoff who have obviously lost interest for the finale??? Modern tours don't need 5 hour stages live on TV the riders don't justify it. Flanders....Roubaix now that is exciting racing. Hello pro cyclists? At least try to entertain the viewers with some action outside the last 5KM's.......

Did Grand Tours from years ago have lots of early attacks by GC contenders? Have the racing in stages really changed or has it been this way forever?

 

[PCutter]

Hmm, here's an idea. Dont turn you TV on until the last hour. Viola! You have a one hour package excluding the rolling. Problem solved.

 

[montagna lunga]

Tours don't suck, the absence of 100% of live feed in markets where a Versus or USA Network thinks they can make a buck is what sucks! Oh, and ditto to the credit for 80's coverage as well as the comment that GTs work better (edited) as movies (or "shows") than abbreviated "live events" that are only live because they coincide with whats going on at broadcast time.

 

[ditkaswheel]

I love me a Grand Tour. Could watch that shiz all day.

The jockos on ESPN and 97% of the American public agree with you though...

 

[forty four]

I enjoyed the old CBS coverage (remember John Tesh?) in the mid-late 80's. They taped a week's worth of the Tour then showed the best highlights from each stage and because of this were able to wrap a lot of it up with good story and tension. Then they would show 'live' coverage from the Sunday stage and then the finale into Paris. I still think Grand Tours are better presented as a well edited movie rather than live. They should bring back that format but maybe not John Tesh ;- )

i agree so true.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

I personally agree TV coverage could be better. Most of, or all, the time you'll see coverage start with the last 50 Km of the stage. I'd like to see the first 50 Km when all the breakaways are trying to form, skip the middle, and then pick up the racing again in the last 50 Km.

 

[rhubroma]

I love me a Grand Tour. Could watch that shiz all day.

The jockos on ESPN and 97% of the American public agree with you though...

In fact the pleasure of watching is letting the drama unfold at its natural pace, over time, while listening to commentators who actually know what they are talking about as in Italy, France, Belgium and the Netherlands. Americans seem to always want the easy fix, the pre-packaged and artificial, block buster action, etc. Slow down. Enjoy the ride.

 

[Paco_P]

............they don't actually suck but TV coverage is 20 years to late. Tell me when was the last time that you saw an important attack into 5 hour total TV coverage stage???? When? 1998?? Why air 4 hours of spinning which turnsoff who have obviously lost interest for the finale??? Modern tours don't need 5 hour stages live on TV the riders don't justify it. Flanders....Roubaix now that is exciting racing. Hello pro cyclists? At least try to entertain the viewers with some action outside the last 5KM's.......

This is because you live in some English speaking country. In Spain, for example, we are on vacation, or home early from work, and the best part of each day's ride comes on just after our big lunch, between 3 and 5 in the afternoon. We lie on our sofas and listen to the relatively entertaining commentary of Pedro Delgado (who at least knows what's he's talking about) and Carlos Andres (I think that's his name), and wait soporifically for a big attack.

 

[Jeanne]

This is because you live in some English speaking country. In Spain, for example, we are on vacation, or home early from work, and the best part of each day's ride comes on just after our big lunch, between 3 and 5 in the afternoon. We lie on our sofas and listen to the relatively entertaining commentary of Pedro Delgado (who at least knows what's he's talking about) and Carlos Andres (I think that's his name), and wait soporifically for a big attack.

totally agree! commentaries can be also very funny and truly entertaining, and they tell a lot about the country where the race takes place. I personally enjoy it very much every time. And when the stage is over, hopefully after an exiting finish, can`t wait to get on the bike myself

 

[Archibald]

............they don't actually suck but TV coverage is 20 years to late. Tell me when was the last time that you saw an important attack into 5 hour total TV coverage stage???? When? 1998?? Why air 4 hours of spinning which turnsoff who have obviously lost interest for the finale??? Modern tours don't need 5 hour stages live on TV the riders don't justify it. Flanders....Roubaix now that is exciting racing. Hello pro cyclists? At least try to entertain the viewers with some action outside the last 5KM's.......

Did you see this year's Giro?
Many's a time the broadcast started and it took some time to work out what had happened earlier...

 

[Four Winds]

There's a lot more to watching a GT stage than just the cycling tho. I love all the helicopter shots of towns, castles etc and all the wee presentations that the local villagers do in the fields. I've had a few good holidays on the back of places I've see on cycling coverage!

Generally this year I "sky plussed" all the stages and then I could fast forward at my leisure. But for the weekend stages I liked to watch the whole thing.

In our house we also have a contest to see who can spot the most number of times Sean Kelly uses the phrase "he's in/not in good shape." This also passes a bit of time!

Watching the whole stage is all about letting the atmosphere build. Lets face it, if it wasn't on tele we'd probably be on here getting live text updates trying to work out what's what!

 

[boardhanger]

....diehards

I agree with what many are saying. I too enjoy the senery and history aspects. But it's only the diehards that actually watch the Tour of Spain spin through barren Andulucia. My point being that 15 years ago I thought I was spoilt having 2 hours on Eurosport. At least the action came on or seemed to be heating up. Airing 5 hours of racing isn't going to attract new viewers who don't understand racing at best. Bombing them with numskulling endless stages (which is great for us diehards) live won't attract more. The edited shorter package seems a better way to go for the masses. Us, fans will watch no matter what. I agree. But for the long term strategy and popularity of cycling we need a programme that'll attract the mainstream.

 

[El Pistolero]

Here in Belgium they have a TV show that's called "Vive le vélo!" and it airs every evening during the Tour de France. It shows a brief summary of the stage that took place that day, they do a one on one interview with cyclists who did something special in that stage. They had good interviews with the likes of Andy Schleck, Cavendish, Cancellara, Contador, Jurgen van den Broeck, some other Belgian cyclists only Belgians care about, etc.

They also show some tourist attractions in the area where the stage of that day took place. And they also showed old video fragments of mountain stages in the Pyrenees to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Pyrenees in the Tour.

Good stuff.

800000 people in Flanders watched that TV show daily. And 3.5million people watched the stage live on TV for more then an hour every day(out of 6million Flemish people)

I don't know how many Walloons watched the Tour here in Belgium, but then again, who cares for them?

 

[Tim_sleepless]

In fact the pleasure of watching is letting the drama unfold at its natural pace, over time, while listening to commentators who actually know what they are talking about as in Italy, France, Belgium and the Netherlands. Americans seem to always want the easy fix, the pre-packaged and artificial, block buster action, etc. Slow down. Enjoy the ride.

Actually, North America does two types of sports coverage, the 15 second highlight and the full on live, or "as live". There's hardly any packaged edited highlight action in any sport.

So for Cycling on Versus/OLN you get the full 3-5 hours of each stage live, then it repeated in the evening (used to be with different commentators (Phil/Paul vs Bob/Al). Outside of the mountain stages, 3 hours of nothing much happening is kind of overkill... the UK daily 1 hour highlights actually work pretty well (except for the Mountain stages). However, in all cases coverage of the formation of the breakaways is pretty much non-existant, which kind of sucks.

 

[simoni]

In the UK ITV shows the last 2 hours or so of each stage live and then does a 1hour highlights show in the evening which is probably about 30% adverts, 40% cycling and 30% interviews/analysis/other stuff. For the flast stages its just about perfect as far as I'm concerned. You see all that you need to see and get extras too.

For the mountain stages give me all day action with good commentary any time. Watching the race unfold on those stages is fascinating.

 

[outrage9]

Are you complaining that there is too much coverage?

They do a recap nightly, weekly, rest day, etc, you aren't required to watch it daily unless you want to be current which is why everyone watches it daily.