On Sunday, Chris Froome rode into Paris to win his third Tour de France (Tour de France) and provide Team Sky’s fourth win in the last five years.
Like in previous years, Team Sky completely dominated the race, blowing all other teams out of the water.
Once Froome slipped on the yellow jersey after the eighth stage, it could not be prised from him. Team Sky controlled the race through his domestiques chasing down attacks or riding at such a high tempo that it has prevented competitors from attacking.
Team Sky’s preparation starts well before the race’s Grand Depart. Riders diets, nutrition and equipment are carefully monitored, tweaked by Dave Brailsford and his team of scientists and engineers to ensure the marginal gains on other teams.
Such is Team Sky’s dominance of the race, Froome is already odds on favourite at 4/5 to win the 2017 edition of the race, which departs from Düsseldorf, Germany.
Cycling Weekly reported cycling insiders claiming the 2016 edition of the race lacked excitement. Others were more explicit calling the race ‘boring’.
The Tour de France is the largest cycling race in the world. The global audience reach, both in terms of people on the side of the road and on their couches, provides the incentive for sponsors to get behind the race and the teams that ride it.
However, Team Sky’s dominance of the Tour de France risks corporate support and viewers turning off their TV sets.
World cycling is already struggling to secure financial support. IAM cycling and Tinkoff Cycling are leaving the peloton at the end of the year. Orica is also pulling out of sponsoring Orica-BikeExchange at the end of the 2017 season.
Corporates and businesses only have a limited marketing budget. All sports, whether it is football, cycling or tennis, are competing for that limited pool of funds.
Cycling teams need to convince their sponsors they will guarantee awareness of their products or brands. That means TV coverage.
If sponsors think that it is only Team Sky being splashed across the TV sets and newspapers, they will question their investment and walk away from the sport.
What can be done?
The UCI and race owners will be examining the impact of Team Sky’s continuing dominance of the race. ASO also does not want to hear its race being described as being ‘boring’.
1. Eight-person team
Christian Prudhomme told the French newspaper, L’Équipe, that the introduction of eight-person teams rather than the current nine teams may reduce Team Sky’s dominant display.
Given the display of Team Sky’s domestiques during the mountains stages it is questionable whether eight person teams would have any effect.
Teams like Sky and Movistar are likely to respond by dropping a sprinter from the team roster.
2. Salary cap
Another proposal involves the introduction of a salary cap. One of the reasons behind Team Sky’s dominant display is its financial muscle to buy the best climbers to act as super-domestiques to support the leader.
For example, when Richie Porte left Sky for BMC, he was replaced by Mikel Landa who was equally as strong.
According to L’Équipe, Team Sky’s budget is whopping €35 million per year. Only Katusha has a similar budget. It is not hard to see how with €35 million makes Team Sky become an attractive place for a rider to roll their legs over.
Team Sky’s dwarfs many of the world tour teams, including Movistar, which has an annual budget of €15 million. Most World Tour team budgets are around €12-20 million per year. Although Lampre-Merida competes on the smell of an oily rag with a budget of €7 million.
Salary caps are not a new phenomenon in sports with a number of sports already using them. Salary caps lead to a more financially sustainable model for teams and ensures a level playing field.
3. Point system
A final model that the UCI could adopt is the introduction of some form of points system. There are an infinite number of permutations that this model could take.
Points would be allocated over the previous 12 months of racing. Riders would accumulate points through race or stage wins. In addition, riders would secure points for securing specific jerseys in stage races.
As cycling is a team event, all riders in the team would also earn points if a rider on that team wins the race. For example, during the the most recent Tour de France Ian Stannard, Luke Rowe and Wout Poels would secure maximum points as their team leader won the event.
Teams could only enter a race with riders up to a specific number of points. This would be the aggregation of each of the rider’s individual points.
Points will vary according to the nature of the event, for example whether it is World Tour, UCI 2.2 or UCI 2.1 event.
If a rider is recruited to a team at the end of their contract they would take their points with them.
World cycling is at the crossroads. IAM Cycling’s problems with securing new sponsors highlight the difficulties for teams.
The UCI needs to help cycling teams by introducing reforms to prevent one team from dominating the biggest race of the year.
The type of dominance that is bad for the sport.
James
Guest
Mr. Nitz needs a new job. He obviously knows nothing about bike racing! This TDF was great! Lots of breakaways won stages. The sprints, which are usually quite boring, were very exciting with great competitors and several photo finishes. The GC race was fairly exciting because the times were so close for so long and everyone was waiting for the big attacks against SKY. The problem was that the completion for GC was overhyped! Quintana was his usual self, waiting until the last week to come up short (2 prior occasions he has done this), Aru never stood a chance nor did Pinot. Teejay and Porte will never win a Grand Tour...they're fine in 1 week races but are lacking in 3 week races. The problem isn't Sky, the problem is everyone else!
Andy
Guest
For those complaining about sky why cant other teams gc contender just go with sky when they ride? Sky rarely attack as a team, they lead out at a great pace but they dont make attacks, Froome will but thats because he is the best, if you want to beat Froome go with him when he attacks.
PB
Guest
Totally agree. Same with the so-called V8 Supercars. Any performance advantage is immediately nobbled to maintain the charade of competition and close racing.
johnk
Guest
Please be really careful here - as well as a cycling fan, I'm a long-time Forumla 1 fan. Over the last decade, F1 has become almost unbearable to watch, as a result of Forumla 1 Management's attempts to make things "fair." The rules change and gain complexity frequently - sometimes during a race season. The result is only dedicated fans are able to keep track of what's going on. It resembles a video game - we want to see the best drivers in the best cars *race* - not have to worry about silly rules decided to make the system "fair" I'd hate to see cycling go down that path as well...
Da Spoon
Guest
It's normal to have an individual dominating an event for a number of years. Some who spring to mind - Usain Bolt, Michael Schumacher, AP McCoy (champion jockey in the UK for 20 consecutive years), Nadal on clay etc etc. It just seems that there are some who can't accept that Froome is going to join these elites. I for one think he will - in fact he already has.
TonyM
Guest
Poor Alistair,that didn't go down well did it ?Perhaps you were playing the devils advocate,say yes and your article was a huge success !
Andy
Guest
We should also make the All Blacks play with one less guy, Ronaldo and Messi can only score with their heads and and wahhhhh i dont Sky or Froome and want them to not win next year.
delbeato
Roar Guru
Froome won because he was the strongest rider, period. Not only was he the strongest, but he rode a smart race. It's easy to overstate the influence of his team. The reason Sky can bring such a strong team to support one man is that they know he's worth it. Other teams won't risk it, i.e. BMC.
Da Spoon
Guest
Froome's biggest gains in this tour came from the time trials - Stages where his team mates had little influence on the results other than possibly helping the day before by keeping him fresh. On his other gains, he caught the others napping - the downhill attack and the break with Sagan. This tour was heavy on time trialling and a little light on mountain top finishes (and made even lighter by the shortening of the Mont Ventoux stage). Anyone could see before the race that the route suited Froome more than Quintana or any other pure climber. The fact that Quintana seemed ill prepared and as usual lacked some racing nous played further into Froome's hands. The mountain stages in France are often on roads where Sky can do their uphill team time trial approach. This is in contrast to some of the Giro and Vuelta mountains stages which are steep, narrow and wouldn't allow this to happen as easily. I'm looking forward to this year's Vuelta which Froome will be riding. It will be interesting to see how he does, given that Sky seem to be very good at peaking him for one race and we've already had that.
tyrone
Guest
I think the TDF ranks about 6th on great races through the season, it is just very good marketing. I think an all round jersey returning to the tour would bring more interest.
tyrone
Guest
The only way to compete with SKY is to copy them. Teams need to be prepared for 9 riders to have a very limited race schedule allowing training to be all about the tour. No other team can afford for its high profile riders to sit out big races due to sponsor commitment. Sky is so popular in the UK that if Froome only rode the TDF and wins then that is all that is important. Sky and US Postal have shown that a pure climber wont win the TDF, it is not hard enough when compared to the Giro and Vuelta who seem to be in an arms race to make their respective tour the hardest and highest. You need a light weight time trial specialist who can be given time to learn to climb using a power meter ( or drugs).
Diggs
Roar Rookie
Sky was dominant this year in my opinion because other strong teams got sucked into the hype that Sky was unbeatable once Froome wore yellow. Movistar were the team that could have taken it to Sky, but even though they managed to put riders in many breaks, Quintana for some reason chose to wheel suck Froome and wax lyrical about "more days to come". The days didn't come and neither did Nairo. An eight person team wont do anything other than possibly reduce crashes. A salary cap is interesting, but other teams are generally crying out for money. Hence the creation of Velon. Another way of making some coin other than sponsors. This is a whole different argument worthy of an article in its' own right, but Sky benefit hugely on their close ties with British Cycling and national identity. No other team has their kind of relationship or benefits. The brits take a national interest in Sky and their successes. One of the only things I agree with Oleg Tinkoff about is the need for cycling to change its draconian economic structure. It is just not sustainable in its current form. Point system just wont work. The Tour is a big event and the centrepiece of the calendar. But it is not the only race. A points system which excludes riders/teams will only lead to more teams folding. Due to its global exposure, if sponsors don't get the riders they want, or their teams into the race, they will pull out and stop funding teams. No other sponsor would want to risk millions on a team if the team had issues entering the race. It would be a grave mistake for cycling to give the French this kind of power.
TonyM
Guest
A biased and blinkered view.Froome won because he was the strongest,the best preparad,the most determined and in consequence the best paid and best supported. Contador was heavily tipped to win and his team heralded as super strong.Sadly he was vulnerable ,as was Froome previously,to falling off his bike.Competitor out. Quintana,"the greatest climber in the world" strongly tipped to win 2016 seems to have lacked either the fight or the best of form,nobody's saying.Had he shown that flare he had probably the best possible support rider in Valverde and a pretty strong team in total. Porte, backed by another very strong team BMC would certainly have been closer to winning but for bad fortune again. Theres plenty of strong evidence to suggest that Froome's win was not as simple as the Sky team's finances,other riders,teams and the administrators (ASO and UCI) and sponsors must look and learn.What they will find can benefit pro cycling as a whole.Study the map dont rip it up because you loose your way.
Alistair Nitz
Roar Rookie
US Postal were drug cheats and any reference to their success has been removed from the record books. You can't set up if you can't access the financial resources to compete against Sky.
Alistair Nitz
Roar Rookie
The main trust of the article was about Sky's dominance of the Tour due to its financial advantage compared to all the other teams. Regardless of your view, the main game for a cycling team is the Tour de France. Sure, Sky did not win the Giro, but then again compare the starting line of of both those GTs and tell me which one was the strongest. Sky used Landa as its leader in the Giro. He struggled from the start until he was withdrawn. Similarly, the year before with Richie Porte as leader. I am all for competitive racing, but one that is based on equality, not financial strength. The end of the day, there are only marginal gains between the top bike manufacturers. Each team have expert nutrition advice. Money to buy the best riders. Not everyone has that ability. What is a real cycling fan? Well I won't get into that debate. When the relative newspapers developed their respective grand tours, the never had in mind a sprinters jersey or best young person jersey. Those jerseys came later because the key objective was the GC. So, I am not afraid to say the GC is the priority for a grand tour. Just like one day races are the focus of sprinters or one day specialists.
Wrigs
Guest
The 4minute mile has been broken 1000 times because Bannister went out and did it for the 1st time. The way we get better in sport and in life is not by putting artificial restrictions on the best and most dominant players but by encouraging them and everyone else to excel even further. Team Sky is redefining the new normal which will make all riders and teams stronger in the long run.
Simoc
Guest
What nonsense. It was an excellent tour with lots of highlights. Sad losers like the writer are luckily in the minority. Froome proved, more than ever before, what a class act he is, and Team Sky raised the bar again. The teamwork was brilliant, none more so than when Froome fell the second time, and was on team mate Thomass bike in a few seconds. The highlight was Froome catching everyone by surprise with his downhill sprint to a stage victory, while sitting hunched up on the bar.
Russ
Guest
Disagree with the main points in this article. US Postal changed the way teams approach the Tour, with 1 team leader and a team built around the leader. Sky are simply following this strategy template. Agree with PB, other teams will need to step up!
Aljay
Guest
I'm sure a sport with infinite and probably ongoing drug problems and possibly even on-board motors would be perfectly willing to obey a salary cap just because the UCI said so.
PB
Guest
There are a lot of things that need reform in world cycling, but nobbling a team just because they're better than the competition is way down the list. The UCI has, through its rules effectively eliminated any technological advantage with equipment (except with TT bikes of course). The idea being that races would be won by the riders, not by superior technology. Now, you suggest that even this should be nobbled? Surely it is up to the inferior teams to step up. By the way, I didn't find the Tour this year to be boring. If the only thing in the Grand Tours that interests you is the outcome of the GC, then I don't thing you're much of a real cycling fan. I was more interested in the fortunes of Sagan et al. In case it escaped your notice - the Giro was not won by Sky. The cycling world doesn't begin and end with the Tour.