My ego has not yet over-ruled my relative poverty and brought me to buy 'Cyclebabble' a book which collects blog postings about cycling. I do wonder if I am in it. Anyway, not in the search of glory, but simply because I enjoy the sport and for many reasons no longer cycle at all myself, I do enjoy commenting on the Tour De France, it is the only sporting event that I will watch religiously. I suppose fans of football or tennis at Wimbledon find it difficult to understand why everyone does not love their events as passionately as they do and will extoll (I have found that version and 'extol' are both acceptable) the excitement of the event, I feel the same about the Tour De France which has so many different facets in terms of the different competitions within it, let alone the scenic backdrop that it takes place against, that I cannot understand why coverage of it is not watched by many millions.
This year the British contribution has reak a new peak with the involvement of the clearly British team, Sky and the participation of Bradley Wiggins of Beijing Olympics fame and Mark Cavendish such a speedy cyclist in the right circumstances that his victories in the Tour De France even make the main bulletins (not simply the sports ones) on national radio. That is excellent and even if British involvement never gets greater than this, then I will be satisfied. However, I do rather feel a 'ceiling' has been broken through and whilst you may not see as many riders from the UK in the race as from France, Spain and Italy, you might see as many as come from Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany, and already we exceed Norway (though their two, Thor Hushovd and Edvald Boasson Hagen, have both been impressive this year: four stage victories between them.) In fact with the first Australian to win the race and the first Briton to win the green jersey, there could be a feeling that the countries providing the victors are changing; the French have been suffering a dearth of victories for years, though there are some young riders who may shift that in the next five years. Briton Mark Cavendish is rapidly climbing through the record tables with incredible consistency. He has the grace to acknolwedge the strength of the team he has around him at HTC and it would be a challenge if he lost them or especially those who lead him out went in different directions.
The Tour had a range of modifications this year, the most successful seems to have been the introduction of a single 'sprint' point along each stage, with a decent amount of points for the person winning that stage, towards the green jersey competition. This has made for genuine racing at that part of each day's race and has left the green jersey competition much more open than it otherwise would have been. In addition, the 20 points deduction for sprinters coming in after the cut-off time when permitted to continue because they were alongside more than 20% of the field, especially in the stages in the Alps, brought an additional complication. The lay out of some of the finishes was also interesting, with more slight inclines to break the flow of the pure sprinters. However, given the level of Cavendish's tally, this seems to have opened up opportunities for a wider range of cyclists to win a stage without being to the real detriment of the devoted sprinters, so that must be seen as another good idea.
The unpredictability of the race this year, especially for those of us who watched through the long and sometimes monotonous years of Indurain and Armstrong's dominance (though saying that the unexpected could often happen with Armstrong even when the overall result was in no doubt; far less so with Indurain) not being able to predict the outcome made the whole competition far more engaging for the spectators. I think this element was given extra depth by Thor Hushovd and especially Thomas Voeckler. All sports like heroes, but in the Tour De France both the heroes (and the villains) seem to be cast much greater than in other sports, partly due to the extremity of hauling yourself across thousands of kilometres of France (and other countries) and because for three weeks we see these men having to perform for hours every day in a way that other sports are not set up for that.
As I have noted before in reference to Cadel Evans, cycling fans seem to demand that their sportsmen have a decent personality. They like aggressive riding, but they also expect graciousness and gentlemanly behaviour. Evans had to really work at his personality especially in front of the cameras. I dislike the man but far less than I used to. He worked hard and though not winning a stage clearly demonstrated the consistency day-after-day that is what it takes to be a Tour victor. A man who can climb as well as him and time trial as well will always stand a chance and this year he seemed able to shake off the variety of things such as injury and a weak team that have hampered him in the past. I guess if he had been luckier with those two elements in the past it would be him and not Contador with three victories to his name. He will have to work hard to gaint he level of support that even the Schlecks get, outside his own country.
Hushovd, also seems a changed man in this respect, perhaps as he has been successful. However, we cheer him more when he breaks away and wins than when he was being sour about Mark Cavendish. Sensibly, Hushovd has rejigged his approach, he can sprint but will never be as fast as Cavendish but the Norwegian has a wider range of skills as he showed in the stages he won this year, involving a lot of climbing but also finishing fast. As for Voeckler, his boy-like glee and his self-effacing manner would have made him a star even if he had only held the yellow jersey for a fraction of the time he did. Holding on to it by 15 seconds after clambering up the mountain was the kind of thing that would only have appeared in fiction (though the Tour De France seems to be full of such incidents, should I recall a victory by 8 seconds after 3 weeks, for example?). Such men need to be there especially to counteract the dirty, drug-taking riders that still crop up and so haunted the race in the last couple of decades to the extent that it almost seemed that the race would come to an end.
Overall the race was excellent this year, because it was so open. At many stages it seemed that either of the Schlecks, Contador, Evans even Basso and Sanchez, perhaps Voeckler too, could have won. It is good that there are no outstanding men who would wipe the floor with the rest, especially for a race over three weeks. This, however, brings us to the nastier aspects of this year's race, the numerous crashes. The greatest lost it seems, not just for the UK, but for the race itself was of Bradley Wiggins breaking his collarbone on Stage 7. It seems apparent that he could have been in with the elite group trying to shake each other off in the Alps and Pyrenees, bringing another dynamic into the mix. Other well-know names such as Tom Boonen, Alexander Vinokourov (one of the villains of the past due to his drug taking) and Dave Zabriskie all suffered breaks from crashes amongs a very long list of those who suffered injuries, even last year's winner, Alberto Contador did not escape, so reducing his effectiveness greatly until the third week. Of course, every year there are crashes, but as 'The Daily Telegraph' noted this year they have been 'brutal'.
The case of Johnny Hoogerland and Juan Antonio Flecha is different even though as equally unpleasant, it came from the sub-contracting of a driver who had not received the specific training needed to be involved in a cycle race. Hoogerland, like Voeckler, raised the standing of the race this year by showing the decency of the best professional cyclists. The Hoogerland-Flecha incident suggests that control of the numerous vehicles on the road is not as tight as it should be. No-one was killed, but there did seem to be unnecessary injury. I think a lot of it comes down to the roads that are picked. I do not subscribe to the Schleck view expressed in a juvenile way that people do not want to see stages ending in a downhill race. We want to see a wide variety of different stages, so that the widest range of different riders can be showcased. I know the Schlecks do well on long climbs but that kind of stage is not of interest to all spectators, others like bunch sprints or chances for breakaways to win. However, too many roads selected this year were far too small for even three riders to be abreast let alone them plus all the support cars, the camera motorbikes and spectators. I believe these days especially as this year's race was so fast, that a minimum criteria for the roads used must be introduced. This will not eliminate crashes but it should reduce them the level and severity of what we saw in the first 1.5 weeks of this year's tour.
Overall I feel the 2011 Tour De France has shown the best that the sport can offer in terms of excitement and importantly, sportsmanship. For me, however, it will be leavened by the number of bloody accidents along the way, many of which could have been avoided with some careful planning.
Showing posts with label Cadel Evans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cadel Evans. Show all posts
Monday, 1 August 2011
Sunday, 1 August 2010
The Unlucky Tour
I must say that the 2010 Tour De France has been one of the ones I have least enjoyed. I might have found the characterless Miguel Indurain hammering out his tempo and winning year after year tedious; in 2008 I certainly found Cadel Evans incredibly irritating, but this year there were a lot of things that seemed to spoil the race. The battle between Alberto Contador and Andy Schleck, of course, was a classic, but reflecting on Contador's stronger performance all round, it was clear given the time trial, and barring any bad luck, he was going to win. Of course, if it had not been for the faulty decision in 2008 not to let him defend his 2007 win, then this would be his fourth consecutive win and it would be looking like he would be close to entering that select band of multiple winners, not least his fellow countryman. Given his youth, he is still only 28, he has a reasonable chance of getting into that kind of category, especially in a sport in which men like Lance Armstrong and Christophe Moreau riding the race almost into their 40s. Schleck has come a long way even in the past year and showed that he could no longer simply be dropped by Contador on a climb, but whether he can ever beat him in a time trial is a different issue.
Contador can be said to not been particularly lucky or unlucky, but this year being in such a position was itself an advantage. The first few days had an intolerable level of crashes. Of course, any leading cycle tour has crashes, but this year it seemed to exceed the acceptable level in terms of severity. Andy Schleck was able to recover but the greatest loss to him was his brother Frank Schleck being taken out of the race due to injury at such an early stage. If Schleck was going to beat Contador this year he needed an exceptional team. Both Saxobank and Astana fielded good teams, Alexander Vinokurov was almost as challenging for Contador on the Astana team as Armstrong was in that role last year. What would have made a real difference was if Frank Schleck had been there to lift his brother beyond Contador's pace. It was only bad luck that meant he was not there.
The other piece of bad luck was Andy Schleck's chain coming loose when he was launching a strong attack on Contador, something which will be discussed for years. Contador genuinely seems to like Schleck and seems to have been unsettled by feeling he had snatched an unfair advantage. I think at the end of the day he would have caught Schleck anyway and wiped out any small advantage in the time trial. However, it is hard on Schleck to think that he could have retained the yellow jersey that little bit longer if he had not had a mechanical fault, but this year they do seem to be common.
Of course, the man to suffer most from bad luck was Lance Armstrong. I know why he rode the race in 2009 and 2010, but it was a shame for him simply to fade after multiple mechanical faults and crashes. I do not think he would have had a high finish, but to go out in his final tour this way seems to have been bad luck and it would have been nice to have seen him have a tour a little more like fellow last time rider, Moreau. Others did not have bad luck, just bad form, notably Cadel Evans who seems to have had a personality transplant and is rather unsettlingly cheery these days. However, looking back, his slide after a burst of glory has characterised many of his recent tours no matter his personality. Bradley Wiggins, the great British hope who came 4th last year, similarly had no single bad thing to point to, just occasional lack of lucky breaks and unfortunately as time passed, a flagging of morale. He now sees last year's position as a 'fluke'. Perhaps Geraint Thomas, second in the race for so many days, though, it seems, quickly forgotten, will step into that position. David Millar the rather erratic British rider, was also unlucky, like too many of the riders this year plagued by mishaps and ill health.
Mark Cavendish after a challenging year as a result of his rather fast temper and playful/offensive gesturing showed he still had the power and speed to win sprints. However, it did become more apparent that his skill does not suit all finishes and the longer run-ins can be taken by Thor Hushovd and even Alessandro Petacchi even at the age of 36. Perhaps 2010 should be seen as the year of the 'old' men in the Tour De France. Cavendish in HTC Columbia, perhaps had the best team for doing what that team focuses on, i.e. winning sprints. I think their success, however, was a little dangerous and whilst Mark Renshaw, Cavendish's lead-out man over the final metres was probably right in trying to keep his space, he was too vigorous with his head and clearly was blocking people trying to catch Cavendish. Success often leads to a fear of even the chance of failure and a willingness to behave in a way which eliminates even that risk. It was not bad luck, it was arrogance stemming from too great success. Cavendish remains the fastest man in the last metres; Hushovd has proven himself to be what the green jersey competition is really about, i.e. consistency no matter what the environment. Though these two things intersect at times, this year even more than last showed the difference between the two.
Looking ahead, I certainly will watch the career of Canadian Ryder Hesjedal with great interest. In a more mundane year I think we would be talking much more about him. At 30 it may be a little late for him to be seen as a newcomer, but I expect to see big things from him in the 2011 Tour De France, just as we have this year over as varied situations as the pave of northern France and the Pyrenean climbs of its South.
Perhaps people will accuse me of asking for too much. A head-to-head battle for the yellow jersey, surely is excitement enough. However, I think a lot of space around and behind Contador and Schleck was cleared not by their strength and ability but by too much bad luck on dangerous routes. This year's organisers got their undecided race until the end but it came at the price of inadvertently eliminating too many other contenders.
Contador can be said to not been particularly lucky or unlucky, but this year being in such a position was itself an advantage. The first few days had an intolerable level of crashes. Of course, any leading cycle tour has crashes, but this year it seemed to exceed the acceptable level in terms of severity. Andy Schleck was able to recover but the greatest loss to him was his brother Frank Schleck being taken out of the race due to injury at such an early stage. If Schleck was going to beat Contador this year he needed an exceptional team. Both Saxobank and Astana fielded good teams, Alexander Vinokurov was almost as challenging for Contador on the Astana team as Armstrong was in that role last year. What would have made a real difference was if Frank Schleck had been there to lift his brother beyond Contador's pace. It was only bad luck that meant he was not there.
The other piece of bad luck was Andy Schleck's chain coming loose when he was launching a strong attack on Contador, something which will be discussed for years. Contador genuinely seems to like Schleck and seems to have been unsettled by feeling he had snatched an unfair advantage. I think at the end of the day he would have caught Schleck anyway and wiped out any small advantage in the time trial. However, it is hard on Schleck to think that he could have retained the yellow jersey that little bit longer if he had not had a mechanical fault, but this year they do seem to be common.
Of course, the man to suffer most from bad luck was Lance Armstrong. I know why he rode the race in 2009 and 2010, but it was a shame for him simply to fade after multiple mechanical faults and crashes. I do not think he would have had a high finish, but to go out in his final tour this way seems to have been bad luck and it would have been nice to have seen him have a tour a little more like fellow last time rider, Moreau. Others did not have bad luck, just bad form, notably Cadel Evans who seems to have had a personality transplant and is rather unsettlingly cheery these days. However, looking back, his slide after a burst of glory has characterised many of his recent tours no matter his personality. Bradley Wiggins, the great British hope who came 4th last year, similarly had no single bad thing to point to, just occasional lack of lucky breaks and unfortunately as time passed, a flagging of morale. He now sees last year's position as a 'fluke'. Perhaps Geraint Thomas, second in the race for so many days, though, it seems, quickly forgotten, will step into that position. David Millar the rather erratic British rider, was also unlucky, like too many of the riders this year plagued by mishaps and ill health.
Mark Cavendish after a challenging year as a result of his rather fast temper and playful/offensive gesturing showed he still had the power and speed to win sprints. However, it did become more apparent that his skill does not suit all finishes and the longer run-ins can be taken by Thor Hushovd and even Alessandro Petacchi even at the age of 36. Perhaps 2010 should be seen as the year of the 'old' men in the Tour De France. Cavendish in HTC Columbia, perhaps had the best team for doing what that team focuses on, i.e. winning sprints. I think their success, however, was a little dangerous and whilst Mark Renshaw, Cavendish's lead-out man over the final metres was probably right in trying to keep his space, he was too vigorous with his head and clearly was blocking people trying to catch Cavendish. Success often leads to a fear of even the chance of failure and a willingness to behave in a way which eliminates even that risk. It was not bad luck, it was arrogance stemming from too great success. Cavendish remains the fastest man in the last metres; Hushovd has proven himself to be what the green jersey competition is really about, i.e. consistency no matter what the environment. Though these two things intersect at times, this year even more than last showed the difference between the two.
Looking ahead, I certainly will watch the career of Canadian Ryder Hesjedal with great interest. In a more mundane year I think we would be talking much more about him. At 30 it may be a little late for him to be seen as a newcomer, but I expect to see big things from him in the 2011 Tour De France, just as we have this year over as varied situations as the pave of northern France and the Pyrenean climbs of its South.
Perhaps people will accuse me of asking for too much. A head-to-head battle for the yellow jersey, surely is excitement enough. However, I think a lot of space around and behind Contador and Schleck was cleared not by their strength and ability but by too much bad luck on dangerous routes. This year's organisers got their undecided race until the end but it came at the price of inadvertently eliminating too many other contenders.
Thursday, 9 July 2009
Why I Believe Lance Armstrong is in the 2009 Tour de France
Many people have asked why Lance Armstrong, Texan seven-times consecutive winner of the Tour de France decided to come back and race this year not having been in the competition since 2005. Armstrong dominated the race 1999-2005 and at times had a cool demeanour, partly because as he became more successful he faced questions from the media, especially in France, who felt that he could only have succeeded with the use of drugs. You have to remember that in this era leading racers in the competition were eliminated when it was found they had been taking drugs. However, despite all the numerous tests Armstrong came through that with a clean bill of health. Armstrong is also renowned for the fact that he survived an aggressive cancer which started in his testicles but spread to his lungs and brain. He has established the LiveStrong charity and a foundation to help people with cancer. When Armstrong, aged 37, returned to the Tour de France this year on the Astana team based in Kazakhstan, people were surprised. He has the second position on the team to Alberto Contador, the winner of the 2007 Tour de France, seen as a very possible candidate for victory in 2009. Contador was unable to ride in the 2008 Tour de France because Astana were blocked due to connections of the former team management and cyclists from the team with drugs, notably the team leader Alexandre Vinokourov ejected from the 2007 race for doping.
Now, it is very unlikely that anyone will ever equal let alone surpass Armstrong's record in the Tour de France and many people worried that coming back after 4 years away from the race and 3.5 years out of profiessional cycling he would end up humiliating himself. Given by the end of the fifth stage he was 0.22 seconds away from holding the leader's yellow jersey, I think has blown away any such concerns. Perhaps 29th in the Tour Down Under, 7th in Tour of California and 2nd in the Tour of the Gila with a 3rd place in the Team Time Trial for Astana in the Giro d'Italia were hardly astounding results at the highest level, but they show that Armstrong is not unfit. The clear factor as seen on Stage 3 of the Tour de France was that Armstrong is experienced. He could always read the field well and the tactics he pulled in the mountains in the years of his victories were as vital as his stamina. This is what made Armstrong, though at times rather irritable (though we had not experienced Cadel Evans taking that to a new height then), was he was far more exciting to watch than the morose Miguel Indurain, winner of the Tour 1991-5 who just hammered out a pace. The break in the field on Stage 3 was not expected, but Armstrong saw it and went with it; Contador, perhaps lacks the experience, or maybe the sixth sense, that Armstrong has.
One interesting fact is, that with seven of the nine Astana riders currently in the top 10 of the riders in the race, how much less success my least favourite rider, Cadel Evans, would have had last year when Astana, particularly Contador was absent. I think Evans simply got lucky. I was glad he did not win last year, but I think that he should not even have got as close as he did. The man is incredibly self-centred and arrogant and gives professional cyclists a bad name. I know they can be terse but in his desire to be a diva he has stepped into the realm of rude and has put himself on the same level as the worst of boxers and football players. He is rapidly disappearing from the upper levels of the General Classification and in my view, all for the good. I trust this year with the race back to a proper standard, he will not come close to the 2nd position he held in 2007 and 2008.
To some extent I feel Armstrong has been sincere he saying he did not come to the Tour this year to win. I feel he has been surprised by his success, but now senses it might be possible to win again. However, we have yet to see the mountain stages in which Contador excels. Hopefully he will listen to Armstrong about playing the field and do so in the way that allowed Armstrong to blow away his close opponents in previous years. The thing that I believe that brought Armstrong to this race was not the chance of another win, but sheer enjoyment. I am sure that he is pleased that Swiss rider Fabian Cancellara is wearing the yellow jersey still. Obvously riders will keep an eye on Armstrong but not to the extent that they would have done if he had also been in yellow. What brings us back to watching the Tour year after year, people standing by the roadside for hours, waiting for days for a few minutes of a passing cavalcade? It is enjoyment of the event and the Tour de France is the most prestigious of cycling's events. I think Armstrong enjoys simply taking part, riding those roads, being mixed up in all of day's events. Though not all the pressure is off him, and he is getting more than he perhaps might have hoped for, it is certainly less than when he was winning yellow year after year, so he can enjoy the event to a much greater extent and share his vast expertise with the next generation like Contador, only 26.
I think we can see something that there was a similar motive for German rider, Erik Zabel, a sprinter who was still riding in last year's Tour de France at the age of 38, having won the green points jersey every year 1996-2001 and by 2008 still coming 3rd in that competition. Zabel is now a technical advisor to Team Columbia HTC on which British sprint marvel, Mark Cavendish (who has already won 2 stages this year and managed 4 in total last year) rides. These men love the sport and are going to be at the heart of it as long as they can. For Armstrong it is not a sad swansong, rather he can participate in an event he loves without everyone spoiling it for him by targeting him day after day. Well, that was the theory. His experience and clear enduring strength may make things more complex for him in the next fortnight.
Now, it is very unlikely that anyone will ever equal let alone surpass Armstrong's record in the Tour de France and many people worried that coming back after 4 years away from the race and 3.5 years out of profiessional cycling he would end up humiliating himself. Given by the end of the fifth stage he was 0.22 seconds away from holding the leader's yellow jersey, I think has blown away any such concerns. Perhaps 29th in the Tour Down Under, 7th in Tour of California and 2nd in the Tour of the Gila with a 3rd place in the Team Time Trial for Astana in the Giro d'Italia were hardly astounding results at the highest level, but they show that Armstrong is not unfit. The clear factor as seen on Stage 3 of the Tour de France was that Armstrong is experienced. He could always read the field well and the tactics he pulled in the mountains in the years of his victories were as vital as his stamina. This is what made Armstrong, though at times rather irritable (though we had not experienced Cadel Evans taking that to a new height then), was he was far more exciting to watch than the morose Miguel Indurain, winner of the Tour 1991-5 who just hammered out a pace. The break in the field on Stage 3 was not expected, but Armstrong saw it and went with it; Contador, perhaps lacks the experience, or maybe the sixth sense, that Armstrong has.
One interesting fact is, that with seven of the nine Astana riders currently in the top 10 of the riders in the race, how much less success my least favourite rider, Cadel Evans, would have had last year when Astana, particularly Contador was absent. I think Evans simply got lucky. I was glad he did not win last year, but I think that he should not even have got as close as he did. The man is incredibly self-centred and arrogant and gives professional cyclists a bad name. I know they can be terse but in his desire to be a diva he has stepped into the realm of rude and has put himself on the same level as the worst of boxers and football players. He is rapidly disappearing from the upper levels of the General Classification and in my view, all for the good. I trust this year with the race back to a proper standard, he will not come close to the 2nd position he held in 2007 and 2008.
To some extent I feel Armstrong has been sincere he saying he did not come to the Tour this year to win. I feel he has been surprised by his success, but now senses it might be possible to win again. However, we have yet to see the mountain stages in which Contador excels. Hopefully he will listen to Armstrong about playing the field and do so in the way that allowed Armstrong to blow away his close opponents in previous years. The thing that I believe that brought Armstrong to this race was not the chance of another win, but sheer enjoyment. I am sure that he is pleased that Swiss rider Fabian Cancellara is wearing the yellow jersey still. Obvously riders will keep an eye on Armstrong but not to the extent that they would have done if he had also been in yellow. What brings us back to watching the Tour year after year, people standing by the roadside for hours, waiting for days for a few minutes of a passing cavalcade? It is enjoyment of the event and the Tour de France is the most prestigious of cycling's events. I think Armstrong enjoys simply taking part, riding those roads, being mixed up in all of day's events. Though not all the pressure is off him, and he is getting more than he perhaps might have hoped for, it is certainly less than when he was winning yellow year after year, so he can enjoy the event to a much greater extent and share his vast expertise with the next generation like Contador, only 26.
I think we can see something that there was a similar motive for German rider, Erik Zabel, a sprinter who was still riding in last year's Tour de France at the age of 38, having won the green points jersey every year 1996-2001 and by 2008 still coming 3rd in that competition. Zabel is now a technical advisor to Team Columbia HTC on which British sprint marvel, Mark Cavendish (who has already won 2 stages this year and managed 4 in total last year) rides. These men love the sport and are going to be at the heart of it as long as they can. For Armstrong it is not a sad swansong, rather he can participate in an event he loves without everyone spoiling it for him by targeting him day after day. Well, that was the theory. His experience and clear enduring strength may make things more complex for him in the next fortnight.
Monday, 28 July 2008
A Very Good Tour
Well, regular readers will know my opinion of Cadel Evans in the Tour de France and so will understand how glad I was that he was not able to pull back the time on Carlos Sastre on the time trial on Saturday and so went on to ultimate victory. Sastre is very self-effacing a trait which appeals highly to British viewers but probably seems perverse to US or Australian ones.
Commentators say fans of the Tour de France divide into two camps, those who like to see a champion like Miguel Indurain or Lance Armstrong tactically and strategically take apart the opposition and those, including myself, who prefer an open race in which it is uncertain who will win and there are chops and changes throughout. The 2008 race was in the latter category, often with less than a minute dividing the top 5-6 riders and there were others such as Denis Menchov and Bernhard Kohl with maybe some more luck could have won. There were days when successful breakaways won for heroes like Marcus Burghart of Stage 18 or Sylvain Chavanel of Stage 19 and there were stages for sprinters, notably the four victories by Mark Cavendish, the best a British rider has done in a single tour. There was excellent tension, such as on the first day in the Alps when Sastre staked out his claim for victory by breaking away in Alpe D'Huez and then again in the final time trial as he rode excellently to hold on to it. Seven people held the yellow jersey throughout the race this year and even when it seemed a foregone conclusion that Cadel Evans would win, there were still surprises, it was really edge of the seat stuff.
The interesting thing is that the man who won the Tour de France last year, Alberto Contador was not invited to compete this year. This is because the Central Asian team, Astana that he rides for were barred in 2006 and kicked out in 2007 when Alexandre Vinokourov, Andrey Kashechkin and Matthias Kessler were detected as having taken drugs. The Astana team is now run by Johan Bruyneel and he has a strict drugs checking policy, but clearly the team has to serve its time in exile before the authorities will let it back in. I do hope so as a Sastre-Contador-Evans (plus Menchov and Kohl) battle will make for exciting cycling.
The thing that stopped 2008 being an excellent tour for me was the continued presence of drugs. Of course it was nothing on the scandals of recent years. In 2006 Floyd Landis was stripped of his victory of the whole race for drugs taking. Last year two leaders of the race, Alexandre Vinukurov was kicked out for drug taking and then Michael Rasmussen for irregularities around his drug tests. Last year whole teams went, this year Moises Duenas Nevado and Manuel Beltran were removed but their teams remained, following the removal of Ricardo Ricco who had one the 9th stage and the departure of the Saunier Duval team with the winner of Stage 10, Leonardo Piepoli and Juan Jose Cobo who came second on that stage. Effectively the Barloworld team funded from South Africa will dissolve after Nevado on that team was caught, as they are withdrawing sponsorship. This is the shame as Barloworld were one of the few non-European teams. Interestingly the new approach of the authorities targeting suspicious riders seems to have paid off, maybe in future they should be barred from even entering. Three teams in this year's race have their own drugs monitoring on top of the official one and I think in future any team being entered into the race must be compelled to adopt this approach.
The thing that effectively lost Cadel Evans the 2008 Tour de France was his team, Silence Lotto. They were almost invisible in the race and you can contrast this with the strength of the CSC team which put first Frank Schleck and then Carlos Sastre into the yellow jersey. A team even half as good as CSC would have allowed Evans to claw back Sastre's gain on Alpe D'Huez which was a model of team working with the two Schleck brothers policing the people pursuing Sastre and breaking up any pursuit. Evans had no-one to help him counter that and he also lacked the gall of someone like Armstrong, who knew that even when he was in the yellow jersey sometimes he had to attack rather than simply defend. Evans has come second in 2007 and 2008. He can win the Tour (though given his acid personality I hope he never does) if he can get even 2-3 decent team members around him. He has the all-round ability which he has demonstrated throughout this race, but he lacks that added spark of a team that can haul him up a mountain or break up his pursuers that both Sastre and Frank Schleck could call upon. The Tour de France was won by the CSC not only in actuality, but in terms of performance and they are an example in terms of how they work on the road (and their drugs screening policy) that other teams should really seek to copy.
Though the race is just over, I am very excited about 2009. I trust that it will be a clean race and one in which there will a whole host of exciting riders battling out for victory. That will be the sport of cycling at its peak. It has been a long, hard slog to reach, but I feel we are finally getting there and that is all for the good. Walking around my home town, I can see the impact that Cavendish's wins have already had on British cycling, there are so many more people (all men interestingly, maybe we need to bring back coverage of the women's Tour de France) and also children rather than wearing football strips, are in cycling caps and outfits. In the long-run this is not only good for the sake of cycling as a sport, but, I feel, for the health of the UK population.
Commentators say fans of the Tour de France divide into two camps, those who like to see a champion like Miguel Indurain or Lance Armstrong tactically and strategically take apart the opposition and those, including myself, who prefer an open race in which it is uncertain who will win and there are chops and changes throughout. The 2008 race was in the latter category, often with less than a minute dividing the top 5-6 riders and there were others such as Denis Menchov and Bernhard Kohl with maybe some more luck could have won. There were days when successful breakaways won for heroes like Marcus Burghart of Stage 18 or Sylvain Chavanel of Stage 19 and there were stages for sprinters, notably the four victories by Mark Cavendish, the best a British rider has done in a single tour. There was excellent tension, such as on the first day in the Alps when Sastre staked out his claim for victory by breaking away in Alpe D'Huez and then again in the final time trial as he rode excellently to hold on to it. Seven people held the yellow jersey throughout the race this year and even when it seemed a foregone conclusion that Cadel Evans would win, there were still surprises, it was really edge of the seat stuff.
The interesting thing is that the man who won the Tour de France last year, Alberto Contador was not invited to compete this year. This is because the Central Asian team, Astana that he rides for were barred in 2006 and kicked out in 2007 when Alexandre Vinokourov, Andrey Kashechkin and Matthias Kessler were detected as having taken drugs. The Astana team is now run by Johan Bruyneel and he has a strict drugs checking policy, but clearly the team has to serve its time in exile before the authorities will let it back in. I do hope so as a Sastre-Contador-Evans (plus Menchov and Kohl) battle will make for exciting cycling.
The thing that stopped 2008 being an excellent tour for me was the continued presence of drugs. Of course it was nothing on the scandals of recent years. In 2006 Floyd Landis was stripped of his victory of the whole race for drugs taking. Last year two leaders of the race, Alexandre Vinukurov was kicked out for drug taking and then Michael Rasmussen for irregularities around his drug tests. Last year whole teams went, this year Moises Duenas Nevado and Manuel Beltran were removed but their teams remained, following the removal of Ricardo Ricco who had one the 9th stage and the departure of the Saunier Duval team with the winner of Stage 10, Leonardo Piepoli and Juan Jose Cobo who came second on that stage. Effectively the Barloworld team funded from South Africa will dissolve after Nevado on that team was caught, as they are withdrawing sponsorship. This is the shame as Barloworld were one of the few non-European teams. Interestingly the new approach of the authorities targeting suspicious riders seems to have paid off, maybe in future they should be barred from even entering. Three teams in this year's race have their own drugs monitoring on top of the official one and I think in future any team being entered into the race must be compelled to adopt this approach.
The thing that effectively lost Cadel Evans the 2008 Tour de France was his team, Silence Lotto. They were almost invisible in the race and you can contrast this with the strength of the CSC team which put first Frank Schleck and then Carlos Sastre into the yellow jersey. A team even half as good as CSC would have allowed Evans to claw back Sastre's gain on Alpe D'Huez which was a model of team working with the two Schleck brothers policing the people pursuing Sastre and breaking up any pursuit. Evans had no-one to help him counter that and he also lacked the gall of someone like Armstrong, who knew that even when he was in the yellow jersey sometimes he had to attack rather than simply defend. Evans has come second in 2007 and 2008. He can win the Tour (though given his acid personality I hope he never does) if he can get even 2-3 decent team members around him. He has the all-round ability which he has demonstrated throughout this race, but he lacks that added spark of a team that can haul him up a mountain or break up his pursuers that both Sastre and Frank Schleck could call upon. The Tour de France was won by the CSC not only in actuality, but in terms of performance and they are an example in terms of how they work on the road (and their drugs screening policy) that other teams should really seek to copy.
Though the race is just over, I am very excited about 2009. I trust that it will be a clean race and one in which there will a whole host of exciting riders battling out for victory. That will be the sport of cycling at its peak. It has been a long, hard slog to reach, but I feel we are finally getting there and that is all for the good. Walking around my home town, I can see the impact that Cavendish's wins have already had on British cycling, there are so many more people (all men interestingly, maybe we need to bring back coverage of the women's Tour de France) and also children rather than wearing football strips, are in cycling caps and outfits. In the long-run this is not only good for the sake of cycling as a sport, but, I feel, for the health of the UK population.
Thursday, 17 July 2008
What is Cadel Evans's Problem?
For anyone who does not follow the sport of bicycle racing and in particular the Tour De France, this is going to appear an obscure topic. I have noted before how much I enjoy watching that cycle race which is running currently. The leader on time (by 1 second over the next nearest competitor) is an Australian called Cadel Evans who has been tipped as a contender to win the competition for the last 3-4 years. Australia has been producing very strong cyclists in the 2000s notably Robbie McEwan and Stuart O'Grady, but they tend to be good at sprints and winning one or two stages rather than have the mix of abilities needed to win the Tour de France which has flat and mountainous stages, urban and rural riding plus time trials. In addition you need a decent team to get you in position and protect you in the 'pack' of the peloton.
Cadel Evans won the yellow jersey which the leader of the race wears two days back, having had a nasty crash the day before. Crashes are a daily occurrence in the race, not surprising when 160+ riders are trying to charge down narrow streets or wind and rain swept roads. Evans pulled back and kept enough time to win. All very admirable. My problem with him is his attitude. Maybe I expect too much of the sportsmen. I expect them to be clean of drugs, which Evans and probably 95% of the racers are. I also expect them to have patience with the media especially when they are treating them fairly. If it was not for the media there would be no race. The Tour de France was first launched by 'L'Auto' newspaper in 1903 to boost its sales. It was the success in doing that which meant the competition continued. These days the event is run by the Société du Tour de France, a subsidiary of Amaury Sport Organisation (ASO) which is part of the media group that owns 'L'Équipe', the newspaper that 'L'Auto' evolved into. So there has been a long association between the media and the race. The fact that teams get company sponsors is because those companies know their brand is going to be on televisions across the world for three weeks and the spin-offs in merchandising. Without this media coverage, again there would be no race.
Now, I know sportsmen, particularly successful ones can be aloof. Miguel Indurain was pretty silent throughout his career of winning races and Lance Armstrong, for an American, was quite quiet too; David Millar in no way as successful as either is known for being rather aloof but at least he speaks and answers questions without turning petulant. None of them was as prickly as Evans. Watching him push a police motorcycle or snatch away from a microphone and reporters even from his home country, in an incredibly petulant way shows how unpleasant he can be. Even in past interviews he has whined at reporters who have failed to see his greatness. The classic was a couple of years ago when a British TV reporter said at that stage of the race he was being considered a contender and he snapped back 'only now?' This is a common response from him as if we should all have known that he was great even when he was invisible in the pack and other men were attracting attention. I know you have to be confident to win, but you also have to be tolerant and accept that reporters are just doing their job and not chastise them for being aware of how super you were until you proved it. I have no problem if Evans wants to be frosty like Indurain but if he is going to continue like a spoilt child, he is unlikely to win any fans outside of his family. For that reason I do hope he loses the Tour De France and that that breeds some humility in him. Frank Schleck of Luxembourg sits only 1 second behind Evans and has proven to be amenable and noble even when denied the lead by such a narrow margin. I am certainly rooting for him to demonstrate that even when things are tough you behave as a gentleman not as a brat.
Cadel Evans won the yellow jersey which the leader of the race wears two days back, having had a nasty crash the day before. Crashes are a daily occurrence in the race, not surprising when 160+ riders are trying to charge down narrow streets or wind and rain swept roads. Evans pulled back and kept enough time to win. All very admirable. My problem with him is his attitude. Maybe I expect too much of the sportsmen. I expect them to be clean of drugs, which Evans and probably 95% of the racers are. I also expect them to have patience with the media especially when they are treating them fairly. If it was not for the media there would be no race. The Tour de France was first launched by 'L'Auto' newspaper in 1903 to boost its sales. It was the success in doing that which meant the competition continued. These days the event is run by the Société du Tour de France, a subsidiary of Amaury Sport Organisation (ASO) which is part of the media group that owns 'L'Équipe', the newspaper that 'L'Auto' evolved into. So there has been a long association between the media and the race. The fact that teams get company sponsors is because those companies know their brand is going to be on televisions across the world for three weeks and the spin-offs in merchandising. Without this media coverage, again there would be no race.
Now, I know sportsmen, particularly successful ones can be aloof. Miguel Indurain was pretty silent throughout his career of winning races and Lance Armstrong, for an American, was quite quiet too; David Millar in no way as successful as either is known for being rather aloof but at least he speaks and answers questions without turning petulant. None of them was as prickly as Evans. Watching him push a police motorcycle or snatch away from a microphone and reporters even from his home country, in an incredibly petulant way shows how unpleasant he can be. Even in past interviews he has whined at reporters who have failed to see his greatness. The classic was a couple of years ago when a British TV reporter said at that stage of the race he was being considered a contender and he snapped back 'only now?' This is a common response from him as if we should all have known that he was great even when he was invisible in the pack and other men were attracting attention. I know you have to be confident to win, but you also have to be tolerant and accept that reporters are just doing their job and not chastise them for being aware of how super you were until you proved it. I have no problem if Evans wants to be frosty like Indurain but if he is going to continue like a spoilt child, he is unlikely to win any fans outside of his family. For that reason I do hope he loses the Tour De France and that that breeds some humility in him. Frank Schleck of Luxembourg sits only 1 second behind Evans and has proven to be amenable and noble even when denied the lead by such a narrow margin. I am certainly rooting for him to demonstrate that even when things are tough you behave as a gentleman not as a brat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
