Most boring Tour of France ever?

Sagan wrote:

Only memorable thing that happened this year was Froome running up the mountain. But the race directors had his back so the time he lost and the rules he broke were all for not.

Many of you guys obviously know a few things about bicycle racing and the Tour de France in particular, but most of you are young cubbies who don't go back to the days of Eddy Merckx. The fact is, the tour organizers have made many changes over the years to prevent a dominant rider like Chris Froome from quickly building up a big led and eliminating all drama and suspense. In the days of Merckx and earlier, the top rider often won by margins far greater than what you see today.

The biggest changes: First, the total number of stages and total distance of the Tour were reduced; then, the number and length of time trials were reduced; more recently, the high mountain stages have been changed to have fewer hors categorie mountaintop finishes. And there are ever more stages designed for bunch sprint finishes, though as noted above, Chris Froome and green jersey winner Peter Sagan, each with one teammate, were able to take advantage of crosswinds and breakaway for one stage finish that might otherwise have been taken by the sprinters.

But the top riders and their teams keep getting more sophisticated about how to leverage their advantage into a commanding lead. There is really no answer to this. For one thing, there are no real parity rules as you see in the major American team sports, and teams with wealthier backers almost always do better.

Best just to enjoy the colorful spectacle and beautiful aerial views of France.

Been watching the tour for a long time. Go look at the 86 and note the difference in wild swings. As a former US Postal apologist, I get a chuckle out of the Team Sky fans with their head in the sand. Many should have been scratching their heads over USPS going over the mountains with 4 to 5 guys besides Lance at the front but now the Sky train does it and people yammer about some crap called 'marginal gains'. Lemond called out the BS of it all a few days ago in L'Equipe.

Carlton Kirby wrote:

uhhhh wrote:

VERY FEW riders have won 3 tours, Froome joined them today. Even less have won 5, nobody has won 6 and only one guy won 7. Probably would have been 9 without cancer. Best rider in the biggest race =goat

So because Peter Sagan will never win the TdF he is a worse cyclist than the Texan with the tall black socks? Cavendish's 30 stage wins don't put him into the realm of all-time greats?

And a few more Americans watching the Tour for 8 years doesn't equal putting cycling back on the map.

Sagan is my favorite of all time, so I'm biased towards him. He has a shot to be an all time great when all is said and done. His career THUS FAR is a drop in the bucket compared to lance. Cav can sprint when provided a lead out train. But that's all he can do. Lance could climb, TT, win GC, and could actually sprint well for a GC guy.

Been watching the tour for a long time. Go look at the 86 and note the difference in wild swings. As a former US Postal apologist, I get a chuckle out of the Team Sky fans with their head in the sand. Many should have been scratching their heads over USPS going over the mountains with 4 to 5 guys besides Lance at the front but now the Sky train does it and people yammer about some crap called 'marginal gains'. Lemond called out the BS of it all a few days ago in L'Equipe.

Jean Francois Bernard wrote:

Been watching the tour for a long time. Go look at the 86 and note the difference in wild swings. As a former US Postal apologist, I get a chuckle out of the Team Sky fans with their head in the sand. Many should have been scratching their heads over USPS going over the mountains with 4 to 5 guys besides Lance at the front but now the Sky train does it and people yammer about some crap called 'marginal gains'. Lemond called out the BS of it all a few days ago in L'Equipe.

Big fan of Greg. But the fact is, athletes have been taking PEDs, or what they hoped and believed were PEDs, since the beginning of sport, and certainly from the beginning of the Tour de France. But just as Greg's career was winding down, some very effective and nearly impossible to detect PEDs, especially EPO, became common. Teams soon saw that rather than stand by while their riders got who knows what drugs in who knows what dosage from who knows what source, it would be better to hire a physician who was a doping expert so nobody collapsed and died. The sport became one giant criminal conspiracy.

The big scandals and criminal prosecutions were inevitable after that. Cycling being the pathetically disorganized mess that it was and is, couldn't get its act together even when it was obvious the police and prosecutors were coming.

Greg has made clear his real objections are to the "big oxygenating drugs" like EPO and it's successors. But his career was mostly over before those drugs had completely taken over (I admit his time at the top was probably cut a couple of years short.) He wasn't given the option, ride (relatively) clean or win major European races, not both.

Jean Francois Bernard wrote:

Been watching the tour for a long time. Go look at the 86 and note the difference in wild swings. As a former US Postal apologist, I get a chuckle out of the Team Sky fans with their head in the sand. Many should have been scratching their heads over USPS going over the mountains with 4 to 5 guys besides Lance at the front but now the Sky train does it and people yammer about some crap called 'marginal gains'. Lemond called out the BS of it all a few days ago in L'Equipe.

Many of the Sky riders are guys who were riding well for other teams before they came to Sky, unlike the USPS guys who basically turned into world beaters overnight.

Carlton Kirby wrote:

Jean Francois Bernard wrote:

Been watching the tour for a long time. Go look at the 86 and note the difference in wild swings. As a former US Postal apologist, I get a chuckle out of the Team Sky fans with their head in the sand. Many should have been scratching their heads over USPS going over the mountains with 4 to 5 guys besides Lance at the front but now the Sky train does it and people yammer about some crap called 'marginal gains'. Lemond called out the BS of it all a few days ago in L'Equipe.

Many of the Sky riders are guys who were riding well for other teams before they came to Sky, unlike the USPS guys who basically turned into world beaters overnight.

USPS became a doping team when they hired Dr. Pedro Celaya in 1997, shortly before before they signed LA and Johan Bruyneel. So there you can point to a specific turning point. Not sure that applies to anyone today.

Yes, he raised millions for cancer "awareness" (and I'm not sure what that is because it's not research). But he would rake journalists over the coals who tried to question him about PEDS using cancer and his charity as his shield. As if, how dare you question me after all I've been through and what I'm doing, when all along he was one of the dirtiest dopers in one of the dirtiest sports. So yes, he used cancer and his charity as a shield to cover up his cheating.

Coach wrote:

This was 20 years ago and probably the best trip of my life. It's a great feeling to climb and have cars honking and cheering you on unlike here in the northeast when drivers curse you out for being on the road with them. I spent July in the Jura mountains and Alps traveling from Dijon into and around lake Geneva. Then into the Italian Alps and lake towns. I used the trains when needed. I took the train back to Paris and watched the last stage, Riis' coronation as he took laps around the Champs Elysse and as the peloton caught the breakaway riders. More exciting than any marathon I witnessed.

I went with a cycling tour, don't remember the name, and spent some time on my own as well.

Can't give you specific advice other than do it.

Sorry dude , it was boring . Quintana crapped , Van Garden capitulated , irish and German Martins basically no shows .

No Alpe D' Huez , Cavendish the dirt he is with his phoney bikes for for Africa campaign than quits for the Olympics .

Having said , I'm quite interested in your Tour holiday .

Sounds like a great time .

Can you provide any more detail or memories ?

dots watcher wrote:

Yes, he raised millions for cancer "awareness" (and I'm not sure what that is because it's not research). But he would rake journalists over the coals who tried to question him about PEDS using cancer and his charity as his shield. As if, how dare you question me after all I've been through and what I'm doing, when all along he was one of the dirtiest dopers in one of the dirtiest sports. So yes, he used cancer and his charity as a shield to cover up his cheating.

You don't think raising awareness generates money that goes to research? Christ just save us the trouble and cut your mom's internet connection so we don't have to listen to you.

You got the dirty sport part right, but to say he was "dirtier" than the europeans he was beating is hilarious.

Are you KIDDING me?! This years TDF was great. While nobody may have been able to really test Froome (unfortunately not even Quintana) he still put on a great show and showed his all around skill that we hadn't seen before. His ability to sprint and push the pace up with Sagan, his time trailing abilities, taking down some of the best time trailers in the world, his excellent climbing skills, and of course his mental resolve. Even with crashes and hectic mountain stages, he stayed strong and did everything possible to win the race. Froome alone made the tour exciting.

By the way I'm not a Froome fan, I'm definetely a Quintana fan, but Froome really put on a show.

Froome wasn't really tested by the other riders. He had a lot more to give. He was also very tactically astute, putting pressure on them simply by waiting for them to attack, Quintana in particular. And when they did attack he quickly conter attacked.

Some people might perceive this as boring, I can accept that.

Hinault wrote:

Sorry dude , it was boring . Quintana crapped , Van Garden capitulated , irish and German Martins basically no shows .

No Alpe D' Huez , Cavendish the dirt he is with his phoney bikes for for Africa campaign than quits for the Olympics .

Huh? Did you watch the race? Dan Martin was one of the few riders to consistently try to attack on the climbs until the last few stages when he was just trying to preserve his top 10 finish. Considering He'd never even finished in the top 30 before, I'm not sure how you call that a no show. And Tony Martin did exactly the job he came to the tour to do, and he spent a whole stage pulling Alaphillipe along in a 2-man breakaway.

And what's your problem with Cav and Qhubeka?

Problem is, it's not hard enough.

With a deep team like Sky, a few can go easy one day, and soft-pedal time trials, then be strong enough to drag everyone else around at near threshold the next day or two. And, everyone can't try and get away, because of the over all speed, and the fact that these courses are nothing.

The races are far too short, with far too easy terrain. It's like a damn parade.

The other three week tours are better, because they actually have courses that fit the fitness of these riders. Just watch the Vuelta, you'll see.

what a numb nuts wrote:

You don't think raising awareness generates money that goes to research?

Please tell us what percentage of cancer "awareness" goes directly to research to find cures. Not support, awareness, etc. Cures. And cite your source.

You watched your race; I watched mine .

Cavendish is a nasty filthy rider who is trying to rebuild his much tainted image , fanboy .

dots watcher wrote:

Worst in years wrote:

Even the green and the dots have been settled since very early.

Literally nothing to watch.

One of the things that makes watching the tour so odd is the complete silence on Lance. He dominated the tour for 10 years and now his name is so anathematized that he's never mentioned at all. It's almost like the tour didn't exist for 10 years or they lost all video footage for a decade. It's weird to watch these famous roads and climbs of the tour where Lance did so many memorable things and it's like those events never happened. And I agree he shouldn't be mentioned because he brought such shame and disgrace to the entire sport. But it's weird and awkward for such a big part of recent tours to be completely missing.

I think you have hit the nail in the head as to why people hate Lance so much. He is the figurehead for a group of riders that have punched a 10 year void in the sport.

reallly??? wrote:

DPL wrote:

Just because a bike has been scanned, that doesn't mean there is no motor. It's kind of like Lance never testing positive. In all likelihood, Lance had many positive tests for PEDs. The powers that be just kept it under wraps.

The rumors about bike motors are some of the funniest stuff. Testing for motors is nothing like testing for PED's.

The latest analysis seems to suggest that Lance had a motor in his bike. Even with the PEDs there is some missing Watts of power. When did the capabilities for concealed motors become feasible? 1993, well isn't that a pip.

Dr Ferrari said that EPO could make a mule into a thoroughbred, and it clearly did. The argument of it being a level playing field as they were all at it, is deeply flawed. Lance's programme was the most sophisticated and advanced in the peloton. Also not everyone will respond in the same way to PEDs, some will be super responders as with the case of Lance. That is just basic physiology. Lances VO2max is 73. That would place him at best a domestique within a very poor team in the current peloton.