Ask anyone with a passing interest in cycling what the best race of the year is, and 99.9 per cent will say the Tour de France. I beg to differ.
Even among keen cycling fans, the Grand Boucle – and if they actually call it the Grand Boucle they’ve already identified themselves as a cycling smart arse – will still be by far the most popular.
There will be a smattering who pick the Giro d’Italia, and a few may be awestruck by the brutality of Paris-Roubaix. Even so, the Tour reigns supreme.
Free to air TV coverage is a large reason for the Tour’s popularity, and many of us will trace our interest in cycling back to late nights watching the spectacular travelogue that is the Paul and Phil show.
In recent seasons it’s been great to see TV coverage grow beyond France. SBS have started to show more of the historic ‘Monuments’, as well as selected days from the Giro and the Vuelta a Espana. Even smaller stage races can now be found on free-to-air.
Is this expansion because cycling is booming as a sport? Or is it that people are taking up cycling after having enjoyed it on television? It’s a chicken and egg argument that doesn’t really matter either way.
Pay TV also continues to gain market share, offering more comprehensive options for cycling fans who otherwise would be struck with dodgy pirate internet feeds, and Dutch or Italian commentary.
Another reason the Tour remains the biggest talking point could be because of that massive scandal involving you know what, by you know who. Personally I can’t bear to write an article referencing ‘he who must not be named’ despite the click-bait potential ‘he’ and ‘it’ provide.
Back to the cycling itself. Unfortunately large parts of the Tour are predictable. I understand that any marathon event involves some tedium, and strategy can build slowly, but a month of late nights with only intermittent talking points is not a great introduction to the thrills of bike racing.
So here are my five reasons why you should get excited about bike races in March, rather than waiting for July.
1. One day racing is intense, often from the drop of the flag
There is a good reason why TV coverage of a stage race starts in the last hour or two: the first three-quarters of the day can be dull. I’m sure that’s why the Tour de France turned into a travel show; to give Phil and Paul something to talk about while the peloton quietly taps its way across the miles.
But in a Classic there’s not a moment to relax. The riders aren’t fatigued from riding day after day. Neither do they have to hold firepower back for an upcoming stage. It’s now or never and the tension in the peloton is palpable.
2. Each race has its own unique character
Although a stage race offers a variety of terrain, each day has to be structured to fit into the overall event. It can’t exist for its own merits and sometimes occurs for reasons that are commercial rather than sporting. Cities bid to host the event and the course is designed accordingly.
Some Grand Tours seem to be designed to prove a point that their race is the most gruelling three weeks in the calendar. It may be impressive in magnitude, but you end up with exhausted riders too tired to attack.
Not so in the Classics. Whether it’s the cobbles of Flanders, the white gravel roads of Strade Bianche, the wind and mud in Holland or the unrelenting distance of Milan-San Remo; each weekend’s offering brings something unique.
3. Classics throw up surprise winners
One day races offer some rewards to all riders – climbers, sprinters and rouleurs. The style of racing calls for strength and versatility as much as for outright sprinting or climbing abilities. Add that the unpredictable European Spring weather and varied course conditions, and almost anyone can win.
Often a favourite will be heavily marked on the day which leaves chances for one of his lieutenants to slip away and win. Not so a Grand Tour, where the expected winners can be counted on one hand.
4. There are so many ways to win a Classic
Tactics in stage races can be predictable. There’s a breakaway, it’s reeled in during the afternoon while riders measure their output and ride by the wattage numbers on their computer, and then either the team’s climber or sprinter goes to work at the finish.
Teams protect their favoured rider day after day and only send him to the front to gain time on a few pre-determined mountains. Managers in team cars watch the race coverage and relay their instructions via radio. Yawn.
By comparison, tactically the Classics are wild frontiers. Riders may have to change their team role at the drop of a hat. There’s little time to drop back and chat to the team car. React, attack, chase, support, defend. It’s much more opportunistic and instinctive.
5. Early races shape the season
Teams need riders with different skills performing well at different times of a long daunting season. At this stage of the year the interest can be in who is riding well, who is trying to establish themselves, and who is still struggling for form.
On the down side, Spring’s aggressive racing and dangerous roads lead to mishaps that can mar the rest of a rider’s campaign. If you only tune in to cycling mid-year you may have missed the most decisive events of the whole season.
Of course, by July I may be preaching the unrivalled magnificence of the Tour de France. But for now, well I can’t possibly wait that long to enjoy a bike race.
Bring on the Classics!
Don
Roar Rookie
Absolutely. The Omloop was a great example of an unpredictable finish. If they had access to race radio I'm sure the DS would have helped the 3 EQS guys come up with a better strategy to isolate Stannard. Vandenbergh has been probably unfairly caned for helping Stannard back on, but he'd thought he needed to be up there to maintain their numerical advantage. Yes, the Giro is special. I admit epic mountains are integral to road cycling and we'll never see one in a one day race. And I do like the recent trend of shorter mountain stages so the riders can attack the climb with more energy.
Freycinet1803
Roar Rookie
I watched highlights of the Omloop Het Nieuwsblad last night and it was a great race. Ian Stannard was in a break of four (the other three riders were all Etixx-Quickstep, inc. Boonen). Bonnen attacked early, and Stannard reeled him back in. So the next Quickstep rider attacked. Again Stannard reeled them back in and then he attacked. With just a steady pace he distanced one Quickstep rider, then Boonen and Tepstra hung on. Tepstra attacked in the last few hundred metres, but Stannard followed and out sprinted him at the end. It was a great race to watch, and the manner in which the four broke away from the peloton would never have happened in a staged race. In the last few years I have found the Giro to be more entertaining than the Tour de France (was it last year that they rode through the snow? or the year before). The only big thing that the staged races have over the one day classics, IMO, is the climbs or mountain stages. They are by far the most enjoyable and spectacle days on any staged race.