Is it just me or...?

For many years the same, simple question asked by workmates always had a similar answer at this time of year."Any plans for the weekend?" would elicit a response starting with "I'm going to watch Strade Bianche/ Milan Sanremo/ Tour of Flanders/Paris Roubaix/ Amstel Gold/Liege Bastogne Liege (delete as appropriate depending on what week it was) ...", And for those glorious,all too short years that saw the existence of GCN+, such plans didn't even need negotiations in regards control of the television as I could watch on my laptop if required. But 2025 has been different. For the first time I can remember I actually had to think about my answer. A steadfast refusal to subsidise the millionaires playing the richest sport in the world just so the sports broadcaster would deign to let me watch cycling for a vastly inflated price is of course an important factor. The scummy actions of Warner Bros and their handling of GCN and the shift to TNT is of course bad enough, and the massive gaps in my weekends now further reduce the number of topics of conversation I have in my arsenal even further (and it isn't a very well equipped armoury at the best of times!).

 

But there's something else- I'm really struggling to care about procycling at the moment- well at least the men's version. And it isn't to do with the dominance of Pogacar or MVDP. It is something that I have struggled with for a while but now has come to a head, something I touched on in a blog post just a couple of years back but has now been exacerbated further ( I mean don't the UCI and race organisers read my blog and consider my learned opinions?!??!).  Sportswashing has continued apace in cycling and to be honest it has gone beyond any level of justifiable comfort. An app that shows memories from my social media history flashed up the other day, when I was giving out that Formula 1 was no longer  a sport because despite state sponsored violence, they were continuing with the Bahrain Grand Prix. Little did I know then that the same regime would within a few short years be sponsoring an entire cycling team. The brief happiness that the departure of Murdoch's Sky as a sponsor brought was quickly eroded when replaced by INEOS. And while Katusha if it still existed would have been booted out as a result of the invasio of Ukraine, Israel Premier Tech is able to continue to compete free from restrictions despite the ongoing mass murder of Palestinian civilians. Astana was able to hide behind Cav's attempt to get his 35th TdF stage so questions around their funding will be safe from UK media interest for another wee while. Alula allows Saudi Arabia to have a presence in the peloton, sponsoring the Jayco men and women (ironically when you consider the lack of rights Saudi women themselves have), altough let's not forget despite the friendliness and informality of Backstage Pass, Orica used the team as a greenwashing exercise as well. 

While Tadje taking off to seal another momentous victory may be a lovely distraction, the well documented abuses and restriction of rights in UAE should not be forgotten. And it isn't just team sponsors. Race organisers and the UCI are bascially following the FIFA model of going wherever the money is and forget about the actual people who live there. Giro starts in Jerusalem and Orban's Hungary, UCI Championships due to take place in Rwanda despite concerns regards Paul Kagame's conduct and allies, the former "desert races" that used to kick off the early season.. the roll of shame goes on.

 

So where are the articles by the cycling jouros, pundits and podcasters about this? These folk who claim to be asking the "hard questions" (well, hard in the sense that Adam Blythe can spend a whole show accusing Remco of faking a puncture then when being proved wrong using the "only asking questions that need to be asked" defense, conveniently avoidng speculaing at the same time if Fred Wright took out Roglic on the same stage)? Carlton and co, who claim to be fearless (altough in one of his books Carlton admits to apologising and withdrawing a comment on Froome's performance in one race after getting a text from him, despite knowing that his point was accurate) don't even go anywhere close to discussing these concerns. There was no kickback from Hatch, Chennaoui, Blythe et al on behalf of the viewers who stuck with them in the past only to be priced out of watching our sport, and nor is there any attempt to address the real denial of human rights, state-sanctioned murder, torture and oppression that the sponsors of some of the biggest teams in the sport are party to or are at least providing a distraction from.

 

I knew my relationship with cycling was in a bad way when I realised I wanted more teams and riders to lose than to win. At least with lack of access to watching live races, I don't have to spend a few hours watching only to have to witness a victory by an INEOS rider, Moscon, MAGAboy Simmons , IPT, or Bahrain. Of course when the best rider in the world is paid by UAE, then sportswashing will continue apace and I will look back on the days of Tapis Tonton, FAGOR, Kas, PDM, Lampre, La Vie Claire (ok lets not start with Bernie Tapie!). Molenti, Vacansoleil, Europcar with a nostalgic yearning.

Book Review "Magic Spanner" - Carlton Kirby, Bloomsbury 2023

Normally I'm quite on the ball when it comes to the release of new cycling books, so it was unlike me to not have noticed Carlton had written a sequel to "Magic Spanner". To be fair though it was probably the fact the covers and themes were so similar and I have found myself less active on social media, so it was only when I got an email from Bloomsbury regards their summer sale that I realised this had been released last year. 

This book differs very little from his first offering except this time around Sean Kelly as opposed to Daniel Lloyd should get a co-author credit since he is the source of so many of the anecdotes. There are other parallels in that Carlton is still never one to leave a national stereotype on the shelf- once again the only fully formed individuals are British folk or those from anglophone nations- everyone else is reduced to being a representative of the kind of stock national characteristics that formed so much of mainstream stand-up comedy of the 1970s and 80s. 

That isn't to say there isn't a lot of decent humour in the book- as well noted, Carlton is a good story-teller but occasionally there is the fear he will slip into full-on pub raconteur with opinions to match. Most females mentioned are described in terms of their attractiveness, although he does row back mostly, but it appears at times he is going after the golf-club bore audience. Also despite this only coming out last year, some of the content has aged horribly, though obviously this isn't a failing on his part. References to using GCN+ to watch races may rankle with those of us upset by how that excellent platform suddenly vanished and one chapter is basically an advert for Zwift, but lines like how Rohan Dennis is one of Carlton's favourite riders really jar when the tragic death of his wife is taken into consideration (again I emphasise that this happened after the book appeared). 

There are a few typos missed in the editing stage (a "heel" becomes "heal" and "break" in place of "brake") and I am also slightly mystified by the boxes after each chapter providing a glossary of cycling terms which anyone picking up the book would probably be more than au fait with (although these are alternated with some of the phrases Carlton regularly comes out with while commentating. 

 As in the first book, Carlton has fully embraced the "here I am, you can either like me or not, I don't care and I ain't changing" ethic. To be fair, he does attract a lot of opposing opinions when commentating and generally while I like him, I can see how he can be annoying at times ( but then again commentating on a 6 hour flat stage with so much air time to fill is going to throw up plenty of opportunities to get on people's nerves). This is ramped up to a higher level in this book, with Carlton not being too shy to blow his own trumpet ( I could say Cornet and make a link to the 1904 TdF but I think he did something similar in his last book). 

Overall the structure of the book is clever and introduces readers to some of the lesser-known races and there are a few laugh-out loud moments but this is all underpinned by the fear throughout that Carlton might go full Reform UK at any moment. While this generalisation is most probably unfair on the man, it does again leave the question as to who the book is targeted at- proper cycling fans who are generally a lot more internationalist in view or the type of person who certain tabloid newspapers want to appeal to by going for the lowest common denominator?

2022 Tour of Denmark

Results powered by FirstCycling.com

"Lapize- Now There Was an Ace... " by Jean Bobet (trans Adam Berry); 2010, Mousehold Press

I often rate Jean Bobet's "Tomorrow We Ride" as one of my favourite books so was interested to find this while randomly perusing a discounted books website. As a fan of Bobet's writing style and intrigued to be able to read about one of the early stars of our sport I was only too happy to purchase it. Before picking up this book I was only really aware that Lapize had been a Tour de France victor pre-World War One and like Faber had been killed during the conflict.

                                                               

 

Due to the shortness of his life and the paucity of reliable sources, it is no surprise that this is a reasonably short book but I still emerged with a much better understanding of Lapize. The book itself has the feel of a self-published work (I'm not saying it actually is, but layout and artwork give this impression ). However the actual style of the text was a bit disconcerting, almost as if a French edition had been run through Google Translate and printed. Anyone who knows Bobet (brother of Louison) will be aware that aside from his riding career, he taught at university in Edinburgh and was fluent in English, and this is still apparent when he pops up in interviews and articles today. I don't want to be doing this a disservice- perhaps Jean did choose a more "chatty" approach to this work, but at times it is almost like an oul fella at a bar trying to be a raconteur. Tone aside however, this is still a worthwhile read particularly if you want to find out more about Lapize without the fanciful elements of journalism that shaped the myths of the early roadmen more to sell papers than to provide fully accurate historical copy.

On Yer Bike for Soccer Aid

 "Don't watch this- it will only make you cross".

With these words my wife drew my attention to "On Yer Bike for Soccer Aid" last Sunday evening. It hadn't even started but, we have been together long enough now for her to know how I will react in most circumstances- so was she right on this ocassion?

The premise is simple enough- get a few famous people and break them into two teams - one "England", the other called "Rest of the World", despite it being two Irish folk, a Scot and someone from Wales. There is probably a lot of academic theses that could be written on that one element alone.

The teams then had to do a "stage" race against each other , one climb, one descent and one sprint stage, which all told add up to about 80kms. The overall purpose is to raise funds for UNICEF and not, of course, in any way whatsoever to allow the participants to promote themselves and their careers,not at all and you are a bad person for even considering that possibility...

The slebs all claim to have very little to none recent cycling experience, so along comes anti-establishment Knight of  the British Empire Bradders Wiggo to help them get used to road bikes they have never ridden before, using clipless pedals for the first time ever and STI gears which may as well have been beamed down from Mars. 

Basically the training appears to be Wiggins breaking them into their teams and taking each group for a ride up a slight incline, then down it again. And that seems it. Now the suspicion would normally be that the participants knew what they were getting into quite some time beforehand and had been preparing , and that there would have been more training off camera. However events on the ride seemed to convince me actually that was all they had. Even on the second stage, the descent, (so at least half-way through the challenge), one of the participants responded to being told to change up a gear by saying he still didn't know how. Now we all know from celebrity versions of quiz shows that large numbers of famous people are genuinely as thick as champ, but even so, following a climbing stage and still not knowing how the STIs work shows a severe lack of preparation, and wasn't simply a device to add "drama" and "conflict" because God forbid a TV show simply show what happened rather than manufacture scenarios. 

One of the participants ( a quick Google search revealed she was from Love Island) bailed on the first stage. Despite some encouragement from a team mate (a former boy band member and actor who seemed the most experienced of the lot when it came to cycling) she stopped and refused to go any further, before the road had even risen upwards properly. She then spent the rest of the show doing pieces to camera, without even the wit to look ashamed, and inevitably took a lot of flak on social media. To be honest I feel if she did go on the show to further her career, in a normal world her constant moaning and unwillingness to even try and see it through, and self-centred poor-me pieces to camera (which looked even worse when viewed alongside the UNICEF clips of children who really did draw the short straw in life) means she would never work again. However this isn't a normal world so I predict she will be UK PM or Irish Taoiseach within three years.

The first stage was cut short due to the rain, and some folk on Twitter seemed to think it should have been stopped as soon as the first drops fell, seemingly forgetting that if you don't ride your bike in the rain in Ireland or the UK. you aren't going to ride it very often. However if the riders were as inexperienced as they claimed to be, it can be easy for more seasoned cyclists to underplay the struggle this would have been, particularly for those folk not used to riding on 25mm tyres in the wet.

However as the show went on, it was clear my wife knows me very well as I got more and more annoyed by what I saw. It wasn't a great advert for cycling as, like some of those well-meaning-but-quite-annoyingly-twee GCN videos which are patronising to those who ride bikes, and not very inspiring for those who don't, making it look much harder and less fun than it really is. Also I can't see UNICEF/ Soccer Aid benefitting that much- donations were bound to have been negatively impacted by the ex-Love Islander on her own, never mind the fact that the Piers Moron-Morgan fanboys had it in for one of the other contestants due to his role in Trump's mate walking off a morning TV show (and I'm guessing the ex Mirror editor's fans also had an issue with Alex's skin colour too, if their Twitter posts were anything to go by). 

 

While it may be easy to blame the participants for the failings of the show, I tend to think this lets the producers off too easily. Surely the teams should have been given more than a few hours to get aquainted to the bikes, and maybe a week or two to find their climbing legs? It was clear looking at the logistics in place to run the rides ( proper start and finish lines, security outriders, police escorts etc) that the show wasn't thrown together in a couple of days, so why didn't the riders get more warning to help them prepare better? 

As I write, the whole Soccer Aid thing is still ongoing with other events, finishing with a soccer match involving more famous people so there is no figure as to how much this one show raised (or didn't raise). However I feel it was a good concept very badly executed and in the end the charity will be the one to suffer, and it won't have encouraged too many more out on bikes either.

 

Performative Helmet Wearing

 Yes, just what every cycling blog needs- the traditional helmet debate! 

Actually I am hoping to avoid going down the well-travelled route normally found on Road.cc and  other sites- where these types of posts are designed, like their "Close Miss of the Day" videos to keep visitors engaging even when there is no actual cycling happening. These simply result in the exact same people, making the exact same points and getting bent out of shape. Most sensible folks tend to stay well clear but there are always those folk who can't help themselves. I did jump in early to such a debate in 2015 on Road.cc where I tried to save everyone the time by predicting and summarising all the points that would be made, which was well received by those who were fed up with what is the cycling equivalent of Goodwin's Law, but due to the unique, world-beating tech used on that site, it has been next to impossible to simply search for my previous posts and re-share here. (Apologies for veering off into a critique of Road.cc- that will be a post for another day).

Anyway, what has prompted this dipping of a toe into the world of libertarian toddler tantrums versus those who think helmets have magical protection powers? Has the University of Bath Research which showed that wearing a helmet means drivers actually conduct more dangerous passes been updated? Has another pro been quoted either in or out of context when asked about skid lids? Has Chris Broadman caused controversy by riding a bike on TV without one, where he rightly states helmet-wearing isn't even in the Top Ten of things to keep cyclists safe? 

Actually it was the more performative approach to helmet use that inspired this article. What do I mean by this? Basically that helmet use has become so fetishised and taken on a symbology that, in my mind, over-estimates their effectiveness and in some cases this use actually makes them more dangerous. I will come back to that second part later but my thoughts around the first element really came to the fore a few days ago. I was walking near the local public park, which has well delinated cycle lanes and I saw an older couple on a tricycle built for two. It was lovely to see since they could make their way around the lakes at their own pace together. It was a robust machine and safer than a bike since they obviously won't fall off if they stop pedalling- and in fact as a stable platform it was safer even than walking since they didn't need any semblance of balance at all. However they were both wearing helmets which struck me as odd. They wouldn't wear them walking the same route yet they would be more likely to come a cropper by tripping and falling than coming off thier trike. What they were doing was probably the safest version of cycling possible, yet were better protected than someone descending Alpe d'Huez. 

So what is the problem with that you may ask? It is no skin off your nose what they chose to do- and I agree to a point. But what they were doing unconsciously was adding a perception of danger that didn't exist. And that leads to wider misconceptions among the general populace as to what bike helmets are for, and what they can do. Let's not forget- normally the first question a lot of people ask when they hear about a bike accident isn't how did the infrastructure or actions of the driver contribute to it? It is "Were they wearing a helmet?" as if that is all that is required to keep us safe, and if a helmet is not used then the cyclist was basically to blame, no matter the circumstances.

The second aspect of performative helmet wearing falls into the category of simply slapping it on your head- after all, as long as you are wearing one, right? But I lose count of the number of folk on bikes with their helmet sitting at a jaunty angle and too loose- in fact it looks like more of a balancing act to keep it on their head. Now Tao Geoghan Hart and Primoz Roglic may have rocked that look (to be fair to Primoz only once during that fateful 2020 Tour de France stage 20 TT; Tao seems to embrace it on a more regular basis) but an ill-fitting helmet isn't just reducing its effectiveness- in some cases it actually makes the situation more dangerous. A badly fitted or poorly-secured helmet can result in the head and neck being twisted or pulled in a direction that can add to injury in the result of a tumble- in some cases the rider would have been better off without anything at all. People who wear their helmets in this fashion clearly assume that they aren't going to come off, but still feel the need to wear one- whether this is societal pressure or they have bought into the "magic-plastic-Noddy-hat-that-staves-off-all-evil" mindset isn't always clear.

So this isn't an anti- or pro-helmet screed. Like most normal people my opinion is simple- while I don't agree with compulsory wearing and am very much aware of their limitations, I still wear one. It isn't going to stop an  unskilled rushing 4x4 , distracted tired HGV or plain ignorant taxi driver ending a ride prematurely and permanently but I may be thankful if I can't clip out when coming to a stop some time.  But rest assured I will sure as hell make sure the helmet fits and is securely fastened, and if there is a shared trike in my future then a retro casquette with sufficent luft will be atop my head instead!

How Long Can We Continue to Ignore the Trend of Problematic Sponsors?

Every fan knows cycling's funding model has always been dependent on sponsors- so much so that entire teams change their names depending on who is signing the cheques which can be confusing for those used to other sports. After all while Newton Heath became Manchester United in the 1900s, things have been pretty consistent for almost 120 years. Now explain how Reynolds is Banesto is Illes Balears is Caisse d'Eparge is Movistar, or how Lotto-Soudal become Lotto-Fixall for Paris-Nice and then revert back again. Net App? Don't you mean Bora Hansgrohe? And while Fignon did change the ownership model back with Systeme U, the pre-eminence of sponsors hasn't changed. 

There was some controversy in the past when Magni persuaded Nivea to sponsor his team, generally held to be the first time a funder from outside the sport was able to come on board, although something similar had happened at the Vuelta before this more famous example. That caused waves then and you can't help but give a wry smile when reading about how much of an issue that is, whereas today the general assumption seems to be that people simply don't care where the money is coming from. 

This really came into focus for me over the past few days. Out of the final GC podium in the 2021 Giro, the sponsors behind the teams of first and second place also pop up in the most recent issue of Private Eye. INEOS for their usual greenwashing in relation to their impact on the environment ( never mind the fact the addition of "Grenadiers" is to promote another un-needed addition to the list of items desired by selfish middle-class parents and those type of men who never got over the military fixation that most of us moved past by the time puberty had ended). And let's not forget the Murdoch connection with their previous sponsors.

 Bahrain made their regular appearance in the magazine due to their human rights abuses and Tory ex-ministers cosying up to them (in this case Alan Duncan).  The Bahrian Wikipedia entry includes this:

'The period between 1975 and 1999 known as the "State Security Law Era", saw wide range of human rights violations including arbitrary arrests, detention without trial, torture and forced exile.^[183][184] After the Emir Hamad Al Khalifa (now king) succeeded his father Isa Al Khalifa in 1999, he introduced wide reforms and human rights improved significantly.^[185] These moves were described by Amnesty International as representing a "historic period of human rights".^[107]

Human rights conditions started to decline by 2007 when torture began to be employed again.^[186] In 2011, Human Rights Watch described the country's human rights situation as "dismal".'

 

And of course bully-in-chief in the UK Home Office makes an appearance (Priti Patel's links to Bahrain Torturer) . 

Even third place in the Giro doesn't come with clean hands- while Bike Exchange may seem safe enough let's not forget that initially the team was Orica-Greenedge; while the latter part of the name was simply a placeholder, the headliner is an Australian mining company, again with the associated environmental impact.

Further down the peloton we also have Astana, Israel Start Up and UAE, again not without their political controversies.

The UCI , ASO and RCS in the process of "mondialisation" have also found themselves  willing facilitators in allowing the sport to find itself in an awkward position. The Jerusalem start of the Giro in 2018 and the pressure needed before the 2021 UEC European Track Championships were eventually taken away from Belarus were portrayed as using the sport as a unifier as opposed to validating certain actions. I'm not going to get into the rights or wrongs on this here but the issue always comes down to those who say sport isn't about politics, which is pure bullshit- everything is about politics, and those that use this argument are either extremely niave or, more likely,  are happy enough with the status quo and generally don't want to improve things for people who aren't them.

So yes the sport needs investment to stay alive- but then actual people need certain sponsors to take responsibilty to allow them to literally stay alive. In a world with so much information and high levels of awareness around how certain countries and international corporations are screwing over the most vulnerable, how much longer are cycling fans going to feel comfortable with our need to see the best men and women racing bikes overriding our basic human empathy and care? As more and more populist right wing regimes go from strength to strength and the Overton Window has been pushed so far that Boris Johnson can emerge from situations, that for  anyone with common decency should have resulted in the end of their political career,  with increased support my sad conclusion is that many people are just going to feel perfectly okay with this. So how long before BAE or other weapons manufacturers decide to fund a team? What about Team Oath Keepers or QAnon CC? As it stands really Qhubeka Assos are probably the most ethical team and prove that such a set up can exist (albeit with a struggle), so what can be done to attract a higher quality of sponsor for many of the other teams?  Maybe, just maybe the UCI could put more of an emphasis on this with this now the important isses of the supertuck, sock height and bidon disposal rules have been put to rest.

Book Review: Icons: My Inspiration. My Motivation. My Obsession. by Bradley Wiggins and Herbie Sykes; 2018, HarperCollins

 

 

 

For someone who likes to portray himself as an iconoclast, it may seem strange for Bradley Wiggins to be involved in such a project. However his love for cycling, its history, protagonists, pageantry and traditions is well know and is an interesting angle to come at in thiswork. While he looks at riders from through the years who inspired him to take up what was an unfashionable sport in Britain at the time, it is part history lesson, part-autobiography.

It is well illustrated with items from his own collections, genuine jerseys worn by those who he writes about and with some interesting photos. Each rider has his own chapter (no room for Beryl Burton, which as Wiggins was essentially a time trialist who lost enough weight to stick with the climbers, is a big omission,although I suppose we can't define other folks heroes for them). The inclusion of Armstrong raised some hackles at the time but, on the flip side we can't say that the Texan didn't have an impact. Whether we like it or not he was a part of our history and it would be more dangerous to pretend he didn't exist and write him out totally. It is also where Wiggins (helped by Herbie Sykes) is able to reflect on his own experiences and how these are mirrored by the lives of the riders he is ostensibly discussing. This allows him to avoid having to deal with some of the more unsavoury episodes some of these people were involved in, normally using the formula "rider x had a difficult time on this Tour, which reminds me of when y happened to me".

In many cases Wiggins is very clear about how he liked winning the Tour but didn't like being a Tour winner, with all of the issues that caused him. There is also some insight into Froome's actions on that 2012 Tour, that while interesting, allow for more distractions away from things he may not want to talk about in regards his subjects.

In fact there are often entire chapters where the rider meant to be the topic of discussion is only mentioned at the start and the end, with the main section being about Wiggins himself.  In effect this is almost an autobiography in disguise.

However the whole package does reflect the contradictions within Wiggins himself. On one hand he wants to present himself as the perennial outsider (being a cyclist from an early age, the influence of his father and mother, growing up in an age when soccer was the mainstay of sport), but on the other he still plays up the laddish persona  that so many males adopt to try and fit in with some perceived notion of this is what men do. He even mentions that his favourite photo of all is Nencini having a cigarette after winning the Tour (never mind that Nencini died of cancer at 50)- the sort of stuff that really looks like someone trying hard to be cool,  and as I mentioned in the beginning, an iconoclast (though how much of a laddish outsider you can be with the three letters "S", "I" and "R" in front of your name is up for debate).  He wants to be seen at the centre of his sport in one way but also wants to retreat from this as well.  No matter what persona he tries to adopt, this book appears to be Wiggins is still trying to find out who he is and while on the surface the main focus is supposedly on the other riders featured, behind it all is a man who is still tryign to shape an image that he can be comfortable in.

It's a Gift?

So racing in 2021, has gotten off to a flying start with plenty to talk about even before La Primavera. A combination of exciting young riders and the underlying feeling that any race could be the last for a while, as Coronavirus still looms large in the background, means there is no thought given to "racing for training" or easing yourself back in. Many riders were victims through no fault of their own, being out of contract at the end of the compressed 2020 session and had very few opportunities to actually put themselves in the shop window. Teams folding, merging and less sponsorship money all around means that many have been going right from the gun this year in case the worst happens and things grind to a halt. Hopefully this isn't as inevitable as Richie Porte crashing out of a race but it will shape races for the near future.

However among the many talking points, an old carnard raised its head over the last two days of Paris-Nice. On the Saturday, Gino Mader looked to be heading for the win after being last man standing (or at least pedalling) from the break, only for Roglic to catch and pass him so close to the line, he could almost smell the fresh paint. This then lead to debates as to whether Roglic should have "gifted" Mader the win and an appeal back to some golden era where the unwritten rules were respected. Except those folk who insisted that Roglic should have let Mader stick his arms up in celebration rather than frustration would be hard-pushed to exactly identify when this fabled period actually was. Tales of the past- Merckx, Bobet, Gaul, Anquetil all the way back to Garin highlight the chicanery and out-and-out cheating that was de rigeur. Armstrong "gifting" Pantani the Ventoux stage in the 2000 TdF only acted to infuriate them both- Pantani because he felt patronised, Armstrong because he felt El Pirata wouldn't kiss his backside in gratitude. That isn't to say it hasn't happened in the past, but normally it is when a GC contender and stage-hunter work together and stay away.

It is also worth noting that this was Paris-Nice, a race that has been won by only a few seconds on many occasions. One tyre change could be the difference between wearing Yellow on the last podium and trying to look on the brightside that at least you don't have to wait about for the ceremony so you can get away home a lot quicker. Those extra seconds initially looked like a useful buffer on the Sunday when Roglic became a vicitm of the curse of Gary Imlach, who had been saying on the ITV 4 highlights since stage 2 that the Slovenian's victory was more or less assured. He came off just before the cameras were rolling and looked battered. It later turned out one of his injuries had been a dislocated shoulder, which he had popped back in before continuing. It doesn't take a genius to work out that these injuries probably had a role to play in the next, also unseen, crash. So followed a long, lonely but ultimatley futile chase back, that resulted in a somewhat sheepish-looking Schachmann on the podium top step instead.

Inevitably this lead to the usual graceful social media posts about "karma biting Rolgic", as one poster on the INRNG blog put it, for not allowing Mader to win the previous day. It would of course have be interesting to see what these same posters would have written if it had been Porte or Geoghan Hart who had been in his place. Yet again a lot of folk were trying to inject soccer triablism and exceptionalism into cycling fandom, basically saying that Roglic deserved the pain he suffered simply because he did his job the previous day- which was to try and win the race.  A bit like sunlit uplands of the 1950s or the glory of the British Empire, these appeals to a time that only exists in the minds of the hard-of-thinking (unfortunately all too common), this mythology can only undermine the reality that is the present. Don't get me wrong, there are some traditions and sportsmanship that exists in cycling that I like to see- the handshakes in the breakaway just before it is swallowed up by the peloton, or the previously mentioned example where a GC rider allows a breakaway companion to take a stage. However to wish and celebrate actual phyiscal harm to one of the most talented riders in years because of some misplaced identification with a notion that never really existed is low, and more in keeping with the sort of soccer supporter who feels justified in assaulting someone else for the crime of liking a different team. Saying all of this I do have a question- are any bookies taking bets on Roglic wearing yellow into Paris on the 18th July and still mananging to lose it before the 3km to go banner?

Book Review- Reckless- The Life and Times of Luis Ocana- Alasdair Fotheringham, 2014 (Bloomsbury)

 

 

 

 

 For a lot of cycling fans, Ocana seems to only feature because of how he lost the 1971 Tour de France, and how his eventual victory in 1973 was down to Merckx absence. Instead Fotheringham allows us to see there was much more to this man who was one of the few to actually challenge the dominance of The Cannibal. At one level he was complex, but at the basic level he had two modes- full on or off. Even the question of his nationality is open to debate-Spanish? French? a Spanish Frenchman or a French Spaniard?

There is a lot more to Ocana than the famous crash that robbed him of almost certain victory in 1971 at the Tour. His disregard of cycling tactics and reliance on pure power may have shortened his career, but if you are superstitious and believe in bad luck then it is fair to say that Ocana had much more than his fair share, although in some cases he did more to contribute to his own downfalls than simple bad fortune.

This is well written and deals with Ocana's death in a sensitive way, and while at times your heart can't help but feel for the man, the recklessness that provides the book with its central theme does give the impression that he was the architect of a lot of his own issues, and leaves the reader thinking that if Ocana could just have lifted the foot of the accelerator occasionally (both figuratively and, in relation to his many car crashes in reality) his career and life may have been happier. After all while his personality provides cycling fans with exciting stories of panache, we need to remember that this came with a personal cost to a real individual.

Book Review- The Need for the Bike- Paul Fournel

I picked this up having read Fournel's part-biography, part- poetic character study of Anquetil earlier in the year having been engrossed and enchanted by the richness of language and the deep understanding of Maitre Jacques. So I was keen to see how he would follow this up, and I was not to be disappointed.

This book is made up of short (often between 2 and 4 pages long) reflections on what it is to be a cyclist and the experience of riding a bike whether in a race, a Sunday morning group ride or a solitary commute around Paris and everything in between. It is no surprise that, taking Fournel's role as a philosopher, writer and poet, the descriptions are beautifully realised, but really it is his role- or his actual identity- as a cyclist that overrides (no pun intended) all. My favourite writing on cycling all seems to stem from France (Jean Bobet's "Tomorrow We Ride" for example) and this is another beautiful combination of French literary panache and the nation's deeply embedded love of the bike. Time and again, reading through the book, I was struck by how Fournel was able to put onto paper the conscious and unconscious thoughts and experiences that seem universal to anyone who has ever thrown their leg over a saddle. There are moments of recognition, and moments of revelation, where you suddenly see in front of you thoughts you didn't know you had but are revealed like an epiphany as you turn a page.

I cannot recommend this work highly enough, and it certainly puts a lot of poorer writing about cycling (certain Team Sky/ INEOS riders and their "auto" biographies with the emphasis on pub crawls, I am looking at you!) into the shade. I hark back to David Coventry's "The Invisible Mile" where beautifully crafted individual sentences on their own are not enough to add to an intellectual and creatively interesting whole, and am very relieved to see that Fournel is a worthy addition alongside the names of Krabbé and Bobet in the canon of cycling writing.

Lap the Lough 2019 - The Return...

Some background...

When I first started this blog it was mainly off the back of an interesting year in procycling, where so much had happened that worthy stories and memories were hidden by more recent and equally headline grabbing ones and I wanted to simply use this space to aid my recall. It may have deviated from that, primarily due to my irregular approach to adding to it, but I feel this post may hark back to that initial aim as a personal aide memoire. 

So what has this got to do with Lap the Lough? Well, every year between 2011 and 2016 I was on my laptop as the 31st December clicked over to the 1st Jan, which is when LtL entries would go live. I would invariably go for the option with jersey and sign up, knowing I had a full 8 months to prepare.  However, starting with 2017, something changed. I took a bit longer than usual to decide to sign up. Then, after I did, I was asked to go on a training course in Dublin that same weekend, which while, it would have had me home on Saturday night, gave me an excuse not to do it. The following year I didn't even sign up at all- how did I go from uber-fan to "meh"?  

It was probably a combination of things, some personal and some to do with the event itself.  Redundancy from a job I had done for 10 years, helping build a project up to punching above its weight, meant motivation was lacking for a while, even after I found a new job. I also had a volunteering role that reduced time on the bike, But primarily it was the route change in 2016 that did it for me- normally, due to the flat nature of the parcours, if real life did get in the way, you could still make your way around. However the move to Dungannon meant a long climb into the town for the last 2 miles that was a real morale buster- to my mind LtL has always been about people who wanted to do big miles, since every other sportive was focussed on the mountain goats. It was great to have one that was not about smart-arse organisers trying to put a "sting-in-the-tail". While not adverse to the odd bit of vertical (after all the Billy Kerr, Tour of the Orchard County, ABC Sportive and Causeway Coast all have sizeable lumps), LtL was primarily for the person who wanted a challenge but wasn't necessarily a club rider.  Having to stop for a brief rest on the climb in 2016 less than a mile from the finish wasn't great for the old self -esteem. So for the next two years I stayed away.

However 2019 dawned with, initially, a stirring of old interests. LtL announced a new start/finish in the Moy, and I wanted to do some more fundraising. In an attempt to convert a spark into a fire (if not a conflagration), I found old habits dying hard, so at the start of January I clicked on the early bird offer.

 The 2019 Experience...
So how did 2019 shape up for me? Firstly I need to be clear- (caution- a wee bit of foreshadowing!)- nothing I mention is the fault of the organisers. They do a fantastic job setting up and running a very complicated event particularly when you have to work with humans (and let's be honest if the last few years in politics have shown anything it is that there are many more eejits than we may have initially believed possible). However I knew within 15 minutes of starting my ride with 2,499 of my closest friends that my LtL hiatus will probably be re-instated.

Is this the face of a man having an enjoyable day?

• The Start 

         LtL always have the good sense to stagger start times- it isn't the most sensible thing to fire off 2,500 cyclists of varied ability and aims onto narrow country roads at once. The faster riders go off first (those who average 18mph+), followed by the medium folk (14-17 mph- my category) then the slower groups. In theory this cuts down on too many incidents with faster riders trying to push through and get past denser crowds at the start and also allows for solo riders to hopefully find themselves in a group who can ride together at the same speed. 
However, human nature being what it is, and peoples inability to  read email instructions or ability to assume they don't apply to them, means the middle groups tend to have club riders who were too late for their start slots, and too-eager tootlers starting together with us. The end result meant that my bunch of about 15 saw a group of fellas tearing off the road ahead of me and another group with flat-barred bikes and t-shirts dropping behind leaving me on my own- I knew then a long day was going to get even longer.

•  Group Riding Skills (or lack thereoff) 

This isn't a new issue for LtL though it seems to be one that affects it more than other sportives I have taken part in- probably because of the unique nature of the event that makes it attractive beyond the usual target groups. So-much-so I crafted my own take on the Velominati Rules specifically for sportives . While the groups seemed to fragment earlier this year meaning actual close-pack riding was limited, there was still a severe lack of awareness among many of the participants about what was going on around them. Warnings weren't called or passed back, people would turn to look at the person next to them to have conversations (nb it is possible to chat to other people while riding or driving within having to maintain eye contact) and overall just no recognition that events like this can throw Newton's third law of motion into disarray- for in a peloton, every action has a much larger as opposed to equal reaction.  In fact Sunday's event had me questioning some other fundamentals of physics- for example the conservation of momentum. On a number of occasions I was behind some groups on a descent and could see the road going upwards straight away. Rather than try and build up speed and use that to get up the hill, those at the front pootled along, preventing those of us behind getting the extra assistance from gravity before it turned against us. The accordion effect in cycling isn't simply limited to the work of the late Yvette Horner.

There were also two contrasting other groups, each of whom caused their own problems. One were those who were inconsistent in their riding- I would try and sit in with them, prepared to take a turn, but they couldn't hold their line, were inconsistent and dive-bombed each other on corners, while seemingly being oblivious to overtaking motor vehicles. In this case I ended up using more precious energy because it was safer to get away from them and ride on my own. Having to choose between riding in unsteady groups and getting a bit of shelter, or sitting on my own in a headwind for 39 miles on the way back was not a nice choice to have to make.

Conversely the other issue were the disciplined club groups. They were intent on drilling it in pacelines. That was fine if they started with the other clubfolk, but on too many occasions they came up from behind overtaking slower people and not always taking into consideration the conditions when doing so. I lost count of the number of potholes I was nearly forced into as a club come steaming past just as I was about to move out around them.  
As an example- the route covers some of my local roads so I knew that around an approaching blind bend lay a sudden, steep hill and I began to adjust my cadence and gear selection appropriately. Just at that a club group came thundering past, only to almost come to a dead stop as they suddenly met the hill. Not only did they struggle to get into the proper gears, this caused those of us behind to lose our rhythm and suddenly it became a bottleneck.  

• The most hateful stretch...

Again, this seems like an opportune moment to re-emphasise that none of these issues are the fault of the organisers- they are at the mercy of individual's own decision making processes and personalities when it comes to how they ride. They are also limited in relation to topography- if your event is based on the premise of circumnavigating a geographical feature then options can be restricted. So that leads on to what, for each year, has been the most horrible stretch of the parcours. That is from the lunch stop in Clotworthy House to the far side of Randalstown.  By the time most of us reach Antrim, traffic is busy. Leaving the grounds, just as your legs are getting used to going around in circles again after a short break, you are immediately trust onto a busy A-road with really grippy asphalt, and drivers who seem to have an aversion to putting any of their wheels over the white line to overtake. It is constant traffic and then over a roundabout  before heading into Randalstown. Then we begin a long, draggy climb which seems to have been very badly patched  after some roadworks to make it that more difficult. As soon as the climbing stops we are on to narrow roads, which would normally be fine to ride, but when you have impatient drivers, fed up being held up with scattered cyclists, using any amount of space to squeeze past (this year I was actually touched by a car overtaking me at the narrowest point of the road) any relief is soon lost. It is also about then that we pick up the cross-headwind that will be pushing against us the whole way back.

• Take Me Home, Country Roads...

This has been touched on under some of the other headings but was important enough to justify its own section in relation to my experiences. Over the past couple of years the roads around the Loughshore seem to be deteriorating quite badly and repairs seem to have been contracted out to Les Amis de Paris-Roubaix. While car drivers will only notice the worst of it, from a cycling perspective, especially in groups (and extra-especially with groups who don't always call out warnings),  it is very clear on a bike. There are potholes, collapsed edges, roughed up or sunken asphalt and other obstacles that I don't remember from as little as two years ago. This. added to poor group riding, makes the event even more tiring than it should be.

In Summary...
I am aware that this reads like one long whinge fest- however to bring it back to my point in the opening paragraph (while you ask why I just couldn't do that in the second paragraph to save you reading through the rest)- this blog was supposed to help me remember cycling related stuff and I now have one thing I need to be reminded of . And it is simply this- when the registrations go live again in January I can look back on this and remind myself the event probably isn't for me any more.

 Yes, I have some responsibility in that my training wasn't what it should be, but as noted above- sometimes real life has an ability to intrude on the best of plans. But even in years where I haven't been as active on the bike I enjoyed at least parts of it- this year I found the whole day unenjoyable from the start. When asked by a work colleague how I got on, I described the last 40 miles as being like a "dark night of the soul". A wee bit overdramatic perhaps but when you find you're asking yourself where the easiest place to give your wife directions to come pick you up  is, particularly in an event you once knocked off in less than 4 hours and 50 minutes one year, it doesn't sit well. Yes I completed it, but rather than pride it is annoyance that I did it so badly. Was it the physical or mental aspect that made it most difficult? Had I already convinced myself in the run up that I was going to struggle and it became self-fulfilling? I kept thinking about the training I hadn't done as opposed to the training I had and really the fact that people were so generous in their donations was the main thing that dragged me to the line.

So congratulations are due to many people- those who organised the event and also to those who took part, especially for the first time and with limited experience and made it around. Feedback on the LtL FB page is very positive and maybe it is only because I spent the whole day on my own (normally not an issue for a socially awkward individual like me!) rather than with a group that I was so aware of the other things listed above.  But on reflection I have to face up to the fact that LtL is no longer for me and will be looking back on this in about 5 months when the temptation to sign up for 2020 hits again.

I will end on two things- firstly  special thanks to all my sponsors- you were all very, very generous and that was the one thing that keep those pedals turning- I raised over £400 for Craigavon Samaritans and that money (while well-earned!) will go to great use.

Secondly, if you are thinking of signing up for an event next year and haven't done one before then don't let my moaning put you off- I have gone to great pains to highlight that Lap the Lough is a genuinely great initiative and don't want to put anyone off doing it.

Suffering for a cause...

****Note- this is a slight reworking of a piece from a couple of years ago-  2 years after I last did a bit of fundraising for Samaritans by dragging my extra kgs around Lough Neagh, I am doing it again****

We're cyclists and we are in love with pain. From the very first coverage of the classics and Grand Tours, tales are based on adjectives that wouldn't look out of place in a realistic, gritty war novel. Since the first bike races were held to sell newspapers, and they were the only way to keep the public informed, dramatic tales of suffering and heroism became the norm, the more evocative and entrancing, the more copies of your paper would be sold.

The semi-religious, semi-martial mythologies of the convicts of the road shaped how the narratives around bike racing were formed, even today with our more cynical and media-savvy populace. "Calvary", "Enfer du nord", "Fight for Pink"- these motifs are still drawn upon as journalists and authors try to give the general public at least some semblance of an insight into the men and women who make their living hauling 6.8kg of carbon fibre up mountain passes or across unforgiving cobbles.

And so- this is quite a tenuous link to what I really want to write about tonight. Yes there is some heroism in suffering, particularly when it would be easier and more tempting just to step off the bike- both literally and figuratively. And there is always room for heroism and dealing with pain alone- however we have to remember that there are limits. Limits where even the most ardent, most competitive cyclist knows that they have reached and maybe it is time to turn around and ask the directeur sportif to let them into the car. Even the best don't go beyond their limits without the support and safety net of a team. And this is not just about physical pain and exhaustion- any sportsperson will tell you the mental aspect is as important, if not more so, and needs careful monitoring and conditioning, just as muscles and the cardiovascular system do. If you read anything about Team Sky and British Cycling success stories, every rider and staff member will mention the role of Steve Peters and how he was as important as the aerodynamists or interpreters of training data.

And this Sunday I will be going through the physical suffering to try and help alleviate those whose pain isn't so visible. I will be doing Lap the Lough to raise funds for Craigavon branch of Samaritans. Yep I know it is only 90 miles (I will be adding a few extra on to make the ton) and many people will see this as no more than a normal Sunday run, but I have to admit that work and other commitments (including those linked to being a Samaritan volunteer) mean that I am already trying to work out my pacing strategy (not helped by the changed route- thanks folks!!). My training has been derailed for one reason and another so it will be a long day in the saddle- a few events that I normally use over the summer to get the legs working were cancelled or postponed this year so I am short in miles - and I only wish this was me getting my excuses in early!

No matter what time of day or night, or what time of year there will be Samaritan volunteers listening to callers or replying to e-mails or texts sent  by people who want to be listened to. In some cases they are ready to step off the bike, but in many other cases they simply want to be heard. My Lap the Lough adventure will go a small way to make sure Craigavon branch is able to offer that opportunity to be heard- to be the team car handing out energy gels and bidons to ensure the person can make it that bit further,  and hopefully closer to safety so that when they do climb of the bike it is into the safety of a team bus, and not an abandonment with no one around .



I'm not a natural fundraiser- I really hate asking people for money particularly in these tight times, but if you would like to ease my physical pain and the mental pain of many, many others my fundraising page is here. And if you can't give that is fine- you can do your bit by simply spreading the word that Samaritans exist, they can be contacted on 116 123 (free call) or e-mailed at jo@samaritans.org .

 (Please note that if you do want to contact Samaritans use those details rather than just through this blog.)

Book Review- The Secret Cyclist (Yellow Jersey Press, 2019)

The Secret Pro over on Cycling Tips has been a constant go-to for quite some time now. Its insight from the male and female pelotons appears on a very irregular basis, (so it can be disappointing when no article is posted following some big or controversial developments) but as soon as one surfaces, I click over immediately. Of course part of the attraction is trying to piece together details in the articles to try and work out who is behind the keyboard, but the strength of the Secret Pro is that the content is informative and well (ghost) written, so that this is not the overwhelming focus. There have been suggestions that it is the product of more than one pro and their stories merged and the writer often clearly admits to throwing in the odd red herring to frustrate the amateur sleuths, but no matter what the theories, it is always worth a read - it is just a shame that the dispatches from the SHEcret Pro who reports from the women's bunch are even rarer than the male one.

That lead me to this book, which arrived with no fanfare last month- in fact I came across it when browsing in a book shop next to work one lunch time. I normally am quite alert to new books (for example I'm looking forward to William Fotheringham's Beryl Burton offering) so to just happen upon it was a bit strange. It should also be clearly noted that this is not the Cycling Tips Secret Pro- it is generally recognised that he is an antipodean whereas it is more probable-than-not that the unnamed author here is European. But you would expect a book, based on an insider view of the world of pro-cycling to have more of a buzz about it- particularly when thinking about some of the more recent issues that most of us would dearly love to know what the pros really thought- eg Froome and Wiggins' TUE shenanigans, mechanical fraud, DSs and coaches with links to the bad old days etc.

So of course the obvious question- who is the secret cyclist? Did I work it out? Well we will come to that- at the end...

The writing style is quite simple and clear- either this is mostly the work of the cyclist himself or the ghost writer avoided the temptation to avoid any stylistic flourishes. It is basically "this is what happened, this is what I think about it" and to be fair this is probably a strength- this is basically gossip and it is the what happened and why that readers will be interested in, not a more up to date Krabbé or Jean Bobet masterclass in writing about cycling.

Rather than add too many spoilers, it probably makes sense just to briefly summarise some of the topics touched on by the Secret Cyclist, rather than go into detail about what he thinks about them. Phil Gaimon, famous now for his cookie makin', KoM takin' post-retirement antics actually gets a bit of a hard time in the book. Sky/ INEOS are discussed, as well as various controversies over the past few years. Certain equipment brands may not be pleased with the less than glowing (no pun intended) references but then that is the benefit of anonymity ( though some folk may take umbrage with Gaimon's treatment since he actually puts his name to his output).

There are more personal reflections too- about the day to day life, and the need to balance family and relationships alongside training and competition. The SC discusses the decision he and his wife made as to where to actually live, and how work-life balance was key to that. One chapter is actually written by his wife, to give another interesting perspective but one thing that underpins the whole book is the high level of self-awareness exhibited by the author. He is very aware of the bubble in which he lives, and discusses his attempts to have a sustainable life that keeps him in the right place mentally, as well as his preparations for retirement (the Phil Ochs fan in me struggled to avoid using "Rehearsals for Retirement" there...).

The book is easily and quickly read, and may be of a wider interest than just die-hard fans- for example my wife picked it up and was quite interested to read through quite a few chapters. While not choc-a-bloc with earth-shattering expositions, it does sate the desire to find out what (at least some sections of the) World Tour pros think about outside of dull, media trained interviews. However they did have to be careful in case his identify became known because some DSs and equipment manufacturers might not be very pleased with their portrayal. And that leads back to the first point I raised- can the identity of SC be worked out? Actually I think it can, and quite easily with a wee bit of effort. About 20 minutes on Procyclingstats and picking up on a few comments that were designed to be throwaway but reveal more they seem and I am convinced there is only one person who fits the bill. Who is it? That would be giving the game away but if I put on my cryptic crossword hat all I will say is "that options are initially limited...". 😉😎

Book Review- Magic Spanner: The World of Cycling According to Carlton Kirby

Carlton is a commentator on who people have definite opinions- there is a well worn cliché based on a certain yeast extract that I could drop in here but won't. Personally I like Carlton- yes, occasionally he can be infuriating but he knows his job and he does it well- his passion for cycling is real and he isn't afraid to show it (listen to his commentary on Keisse's famous Tour of Turkey stage win or him audibly welling up as he described Stijn Devolder continually battling to come back to the head of the leading group despite countless incidences of bad luck during Paris-Roubaix a few years back). His mastery of language, puns, and stream-of-consciousness verbiage, often in the heat of the battle is to be admired as well as his irreverent lifting of the curtain showing us back stage at the world's biggest cycling races.

So I was looking forward to seeing if this book would reflect his on-screen (or at least on-mic) personality, and it does. The content is strewn with Kirby-isms (probably the most Kirbylike of all being the one about Henri Cornet- I won't spoil it!) so reading it, can at times be like listening to him calling a close GC-shaping summit finish. The tempo throughout seems to reflect that of a stage- sometimes flowing along then suddenly a burst of action, followed by some more calmness before a final flurry. He covers incidents in the race, on the road, in the booth and in media circus and a lot of the tales that involve Sean Kelly, Brian Smith or Daniel Lloyd seem to match up perfectly with the personas they project on screen. In fact they are such central characters they could almost qualify as being credited as co-authors.

One of the things you can definitely say about Carlton is that he has got a high level of self-awareness and this comes through- he is confident in his abilities and at times it may veer a wee bit towards Milwall-esque "No one likes me and I don't care" it is clear he has no misconceptions as to where he sits in regards his profession , almost taking on and relishing the role of the confident pub raconteur, holding court on many subjects and professing on them without fear of contradiction.

The actual content of the book is on the whole every illuminating and humorous. However some of this is lost when he insists on falling back onto lazy, national stereotypes when describing the actions of others- in many cases he refers to them by nationality rather than name, as if that was some kind of explanation as to why they acted the way they did. On the other hand when he is talking about British riders, he goes into great detail to highlight their differences in character and personality and portrays them more as whole people rather than the other Europeans who are often reduced to hackneyed descriptions. Also his clear love of Team Sky/ INEOS and their riders seems to prevent him from criticising them at all, unlike other individuals or teams in the book. Carlton is probably the only person involved in cycling who thinks Sky PR played a blinder in relation to the scandals and situations they have found themselves embroiled in. His profile of Froome plays up some rather unattractive personality traits but presents them as laudable, and doesn't even mention the Sabutomol case- it is only mentioned later in passing in a different part of the book, and when he profiles Wiggins, there is no mention of the TUE stuff either. There is a blind acceptance that Froome was cleared in regards his difficulties despite the fact that he was not vindicated- a rider with fewer capital resources behind him would still currently be serving a suspension. 

Maybe this is the difficulty with producing a book while still working in the media around cycling- it is clear that anything touching on criticism of Sky/Ineos would run the risk of him impacting Eurosport's access to them which they can't afford- see Brailsford's reaction to other media outlets in the past and indeed Carlton admitting here about having to apologise on-air to Froome who had texted him following coverage of an incident at the Veulta- despite Kirby being in the right saying what he said. It is unfortunate because this does spoil the behind-the -scenes no holds barred view that this book is being sold as. Also he gets a wee bit "Little Englander" towards the end when saying that he gets great pleasure about the fact the British riders have been so successful to the detriment of the traditional cycling powers in Europe- an element of exceptionalism normally found in the letters pages of the Daily Mail that doesn't seem to sit so well particularly taking cycling's more internationalist outlook into consideration.

So in summary, some very nice anecdotes, an interesting reflection on elements of life in the cycling bubble but just a bit too much "Johnny Foreigner doesn't like it up 'em" and granting full absolution for Team Sky despite their sins not necessarily having been fully disclosed in the confessional. 

 

 

Back Once Again (for the Renegade Master...)

Ok, I admit it. Over the past while, this blog has been like a Sky fan's replica jersey when the soccer season is on. Good intentions (you should see the draft folder of half constructed ramblings which would be anachronistic to finish and post now) have not necessarily been followed up by actions either here, or more concernedly, on the bike.  Last year was the first in many years when I didn't take part in a single event or sportive, even the one that starts literally 450 metres away from my house. The bike has gone weeks without being touched, and I was frankly embarrassed that my yearly total of kms "gotten in" was less than what many folk would do in a month. To be honest the rot had set in the previous year when I didn't take part in Lap the Lough, even though I had signed up for it. I had to go on a course that weekend, but the fact I was relieved to have this as an excuse should have set alarm bells ringing- the first time in 7 years I hadn't circumnavigated Lough Neagh, which was normally my main event of the year.

It wasn't cycling that put me off- I was still staying up way too late at night watching any race I could. Paris-Roubaix and the World Championships still saw me staking out a spot in front of the TV for hours. It wasn't the weather either- after all if you don't ride in the rain in Ireland, you don't get to ride a lot, and anyway  Flanderian type conditions allow me to continue to fool myself daydreaming that if things had been different I could have been the next Sean Kelly (probably closer to being Frank Kelly playing Fr Jack). It just seemed that for various reasons motivation was hard to come by (I was going to add "and time" there but when I am motivated, I always find time). I would lie in bed at night planning the next day's route, but when it came to it the actual act of getting into my gear, pumping tyres, checking lights etc, it just seemed so much effort and a quick glance outside at the shrub in the garden that is a good indicator of wind strength and direction was enough to have me back down on the couch. Even a week off at Easter with some great weather saw me using painting the fence as an excuse not to go out for even a short spin.

But recently I have found some old stirrings reappearing. I signed up for LtL back in Jan to give myself something to work towards. A bit of weight loss over Lent and getting some of my evenings back (I have been constantly delivering various courses at night since Sept) seem to be helping. Some of the other issues impacting motivation are still there (though really getting out on the bike should be a cure for many of those). The average has dropped, the inclines more difficult but somehow the mojo has reappeared. I have entered a sportive just over a month from now to give myself something else to keep me out there. And that is the reason I have added to this blog tonight- it is another marker- simply doing something. Yes, this stuff probably isn't of interest to anyone out side of a small circle of friends (hey-come for the cycling content, stay for the Phil Ochs lyrics) but the Giro is on, the Amgen ToC TV coverage still has more onscreen graphics at any one time that really makes me concerned for the attention span of their intended viewer (though it would explain a hell of a lot!) and I've got tickets to see Billy Bragg in Dublin in July- so the signs are good that the motivation should be here for quite some time to come!

Book Review- "The Invisible Mile" by David Coventry, (2015, Picador)

Verbosity does not always equal profundity

Let me begin by saying that David Coventry writes beautifully. Or, to be more precise, he writes beautiful, individual sentences, laced with metaphor and discriptive prowess, and keen observations. So why do I make the distinction? Simply because almost every single sentence in the book is overwritten in this way. It makes reading more of a slog than actually riding the 1928 Tour de France. Often I found myself getting agitated because sometimes being direct is fine- not every element of every sentence should require mental gymnastics to get to the core of the plot. Don't get me wrong- I like an intellectual challenge but this book simply seems to ignore what Freud, in an other context once said- "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar!".

In many cases it feel that the author has mistaken verbosity with profundity. There are many conversations detailed in the book, but they are more like those you would expect from characters in a surrealist existentialist play directed by sixth formers- almost a parody, where every single word and action is drenched in meaning and no one responds simply or directly. You get the feeling that even asking any of the characters what time the stage starts the next day would result in a treatise on the fluiduty and temporal nature of time rather than a simple "9:30am". Even the conversations and contributions from the crowds watching the Tour go past are framed as profound- the simple peasant woman mourning her daughter lost during the war seems to speak like a philosophy professor leading a symposium on the nature of loss.

As for the narrator- I don't remember ever getting so annoyed with a fictional character! If he used the energy he expended on his deep conversations (internal and external), getting drunk and spending nights with a female (both in bed and on car journeys in the middle of the night)on actually riding his bike, he would have beaten Franz, never mind Opperman! Cycling is a sport where conservation of effort is one of the keys to success, and this is not reflected in the writing in this book. The closer we get to the end, the more of the character of the narrator is revealed and it is impossible to have any empathy or sympathy for him the longer it goes on.

There are some twists as we go on, but these are signposted quite early for the more attentive reader (and anagram fans might pick up on one of the most unsavory reveals before it happens). The end of the book left me with mixed feelings- glad that I had finished it, but the actual denouement seemed a bitter cop-out- an attempt to make the reader feel even worse about human nature than a book that is grounded in the aftermath of the First World War (as individuals and countries were still trying to come to terms with it) and other personal tragedies already does.

Coventry has blended fact and fiction in this book- some of the riders and events were real, whereas others are not. This can be distracting if you actually know about history of the Tour de France- yes 1928 did see the first NZ/ Australian team enter and Opperman was a real person (in fact his life story would be worthy of a work on its own). Frantz really won that year and others like Bottecchia who was mentioned in passing existed (although Conventry got the dates of his victories wrong). The narrator is a fiction as is the names of many of the teams he mentions, so part of the problem when reading is the little voice at the back of my head that kept pointing out what was real and what wasn't. To be honest being a cycling fan could actually be an obstacle in getting through this book.

Of course maybe the frustrations, the hard going and the lovely writing are a clever ploy by Coventry to allow the reader some sympathy with the struggles of the riders. After all, they are also surrounded by beauty but are unable to appreciate it because of the demands of just making it through. I felt guilty about not always appreciating Coventry's skill with the written word, but I had had reached saturation point. Sentences that danced around and around what they were meant to describe and left room for ambiguity, and phrases used where words would have done ( "bullets" is dramatic enough instead of "shouts of death") meant that the whole book could be submitted to Pseuds Corner in Private Eye.

Perhaps Coventry's undoubted skills as a wordsmith would be better suited to a travelogue type book, because he could definitely replicate natural beauty on the page, but as for "The Invisible Mile" I have never been so conflicted about a book before. While I don't want a simple linear "We did this and then did that", this doesn't come anywhere near the quality of Tim Krabbé's "The Rider" which takes the same cerebal, pyschologicial approach but does it so much better without feeling so forced.

Porte-nts of Froome...?

Only a week until this modern classic echos forth once more from the television, followed by Gary Imlach's acerbic, dead pan and economical but effective introductions, summing up quite complex action in a few words.  Boardman and Boulting will ham it up for the cameras while Phil and Paul try to outdo each other in seeing who can misidentify the most riders. Well ,OK forget that last bit since it seems Millar and Boulting will be calling the action instead but anyway... Yes, the annual 3 week long advert for the French ( and this year German and Belgian) Tourist Board has come around again, and suddenly rugby and soccer supporters transform themselves into cycling fans in the way Wimbledon turns many into tennis fans for the duration. 

As the first rider leaves the start ramp in Dusseldorf for the opening TT,  the editors of Tour and the Official Tour de France guide will breath a sigh of relief if all their cover stars actually make it to the race, which doesn't happen every year.  Suddenly the predictions and form guides that had been developed ever since the season kicked off in Australia and used to fill gaps in the action by commentators in every race since can finally be held up to scrutiny.  So on current showing, is Froome going to come away with his fourth maillot juane?

A lot has been made of the fact that each year he taken the top step on the Champs Elysees podium, Froome has won, at the very least, 5 races since the season started. Currently the 2017 shelf in his trophy cabinet is very bare- empty in fact. Add on Richie Porte's great start (particularly his Dauphiné performance compared to his mucker) and inidications are that maybe Corbyn's recent electoral performance isn't the only thing that can make a Murdoch throw their toys out of the pram. However a caveat or two- Froome's victories have come because of decent performances which tail off in the last week. Has this year's lack of results come about because of a different approach. designed to allow him to peak later and save more of himself for the final week? Is that this year's equivalent of his attack on a descent and a four up time-trail with the green jersey to break away and spoil the sprinter's day out?

No matter the reason for the lowly palmarés this year (lowly in relative terms of course!), it was quite clear that Froome wasn't at the top of his game on the Dauphiné. His aggression on the Mont du Chat seemed to be more of desperation rather than a planned tactical assault, as if he knew he wouldn't have enough to do any damage when gravity went from being an ally to the enemy again. Even his interactions with his supposed best mate seemed to be bullish- he undercut Porte very tightly on the descent and then steered him into the boards as they wound up for the sprint. Watching, I felt Froome wasn't displaying his usual temperament. Was it a coincidence that he was acting out of character in around the same time L'Équipe was running a quickly denied story linking him to a BMC move? Let's imagine a hypothetical situation- if the article had any grain of truth the big loser would again be Porte who went to BMC to get out from under the Kenyan's shadow. How would he feel if, after finally cementing himself as a viable TdF GC contender in one of the few squads who can match Sky's budget, suddenly the guy he acted as a domestique deluxe for reappeared to put Richie back down the pecking order? A wee leak to the press, at a stage when technically riders and teams are not supposed to be making approaches to each other, would require a firm denial and make such a move that bit harder to engineer and allow Sky to come up with a package to try and get Froome to stay.  Again I have to emphasise that this is just  a flight of imagination based on conjucture and theorising- I'm not saying this happened! A lost opportunity to rescue his reputation by breaking the link that has been tainted through Sky's disasterous TUE/ jiffy bag debacle could maybe add a bit of spice to any race. Even the post-race comments were more barbed than usual, but again perhaps I am reading too much into it- after all this is really the first time that the Tasmainian and Froome have really gone head to head on almost equal terms and we have no real indication of how that plays with either of them.

So cast that little soap opera aside- is Froome going to win the 2017 Tour?  My heart says no but head says yes. It is highly likely Sky are playing the psychological game here- reduced expectations lead to reduced pressure, and Porte will probably still have his one bad day. And of course we haven't even looked at Quintana yet. Is Nairo's Giro-Tour double attempt actually another sandbagging strategy? Go into the Giro, look under par and instead use it as an actual training race for the Tour? This of course may all be wishful thinking on my part  and probably come July 23rd, Murdoch newspapers will be hailing "their" man as a great human being before reverting to type and encouraging White Van Man to cut a swathe through ordinary cyclists on the 24th. Am I grasping at straws in an attempt to add intrigue and jeopardy into this year's Grand Boucle ahead of watching the horde of white jerseys sitting at the front defend Froome's lead? Probably but it is still a good time to remember - races are won off, as well as on the bike and it would be nice if, for once, Twitter wasn't full of the too cool for school types who publicly decree that they stop watching as soon as Froome takes yellow (but suspiciously seem very well informed about how the rest of the stages go...!).

Team Sky and the Soccer-isation of Cycling

Let's clear up one thing at the start- this is not yet another attack (or defence) of how Sky have handled recent developments. There are plenty of other places where the whys-and-wherefores are being picked apart. While Sky's earlier promotion of their own cleaner-than-clean-you-can-trust-us PR image more or less guaranteed  that this situation was going to arise just as a politician who fronts an anti-drink driving campaign will inevitably be caught behind the wheel with a few Dan Lloyd mineral-waters consumed, this is more about what the reactions say about how cycling and cycling fandom has changed, particularly in Britain.

If, like most normal people, you actually read the title of this piece before  the main body, then you can probably guess where this is going. And I don't mean "soccerisation" in relation to the influx of money- well not totally, because Sky's approach to buying up any potential challengers and adding them to the team may sound familar but I mean more about fan dynamics. Ever since 2012, with Wiggo fever and so-called newspapers, that are more likely to be found on the dashboards of sociopaths happy to run cyclists off the road, offering free cut-out sideburns, the British were percieved to have suddenly developed an interest in the sport.  The UK Cycling Expert Twitter feed in particular is a hilarious and genius creation that parodies the new converts. Now this isn't slating new fans- it is indeed a joyus thing to attract new supporters and it is what the sport needs to grow and thrive. However looking at some of the reactions to Sky's recent difficulties seems to suggest that many new British followers are bringing a soccer fan's attitudes across, and this may not be so healthy.

Basically put there are traditions associated with being a football fan in the UK. I say this as an outsider because I don't actually follow it and I am in Ireland (so some of this is also relevant to GAA fans) but when it is more acceptable for politicans to be caught out in a lie about supporting a team than simply saying they aren't really all that into it , there is a lot of social and cultural capital in adhereing to certain customs and attitudes. However these don't translate so well to cycling.

For example I have seen many people feel almost offended that someone else dares to support a different team to them. Twitter exchanges I have seen from people who would otherwise have a lot of common, degenerate into real insults and the calling of the other person's intelligence into question. It tends to lapse into that unthinking brand of patriotism that the UK and USA seem to do so well- basically "this-is-my-team/country-so-are-unable-to-do-any-wrong-because-they-are-MY-team/country-and-any-highlighting-their-shortcomings-is-treachery". And that has largely been a lot of the reaction to the media coverage of Sky (and the irony of a Murdoch linked body complaining about bias and unfair reporting is just too delicious to let pass without comment!). I have a rule of thumb that says as soon as someone calls the questioning of an individual or body a "witch hunt", they may as well run up a flag that says "guilty" and this is one of the terms that keeps popping up in discussions. Simply reporting the fact Sky has been asked questions and their answers found somewhat wanting is now seen as bias and "tall poppy syndrome". Repeated slogans and mantras of groupthink ("haters are going to hate"; "witch hunt";  "the media love to build people up and knock them down" etc) are being used against people making relevant enquiries to try and get to the bottom of what has been going on.  The questioning of "my team" is now seen as a direct personal attack on the individual fan, since they are the ones who have chosen to hitch their wagon to Brailsford's band of brothers (with no room for the sisters according to Jess Varnish. Lizzie Deignan and Nicole Cooke).

This approach to fandom is really quite alien to cycling. Most die-hards are fans of particular riders rather than teams- indeed it is hard to give allegiance to a team whose name (and nationality) can change from season to season based on who is paying the rider's wages. There is also the fact that many people will have a team they support for the Classics, another for the Grand Tours and their national squad for the Olympics or World Championships. Sky in many ways are the cycling equivalent of the late 90s-early 2000s Manchester United- they are an easy team for the late-comer or casual observer to get behind because of their success and British identity (is it wrong to point out that neither of Sky's Tour winners were actually born in the UK...?) and being a well funded operation. The tribalism of soccer is not needed in cycling and in fact could be quite damaging.  New fans are very welcome and are to be encouraged, but they also need to be reminded that the structures and traditions of our sport do not fare well when people become so blinded to team loyalty that they are unwilling for questions to be asked. One reason Lance got away with what he did for so long was an unwillingness and inability to openly question. If a Sky fan gets bent out of shape every time a team rider gets asked about doping they would end up ressembling the route map for the Ronde van Vlaanderen. It is unfortunate but for journalists doing their jobs means that Chris Froome is going to have to answer the same question thrown at him in various languages every day he wears yellow. To be fair to Froome, he handles this with grace and politeness, so maybe the Sky fans need to learn from him, and await the outcomes of the UKADA investigation before feeling put upon.

This week's Cycling Weekly included the results of a poll around attitudes to Sky and the vast majority of printed responses went more for attacking the journalists and MPs than actually engaging with the premise of the question. However, at the risk of falling into the trap of stereotyping nationalities I ask this- if it had been Katusha or Astana in the firing line would the Sky (and British Cycling) fans be responding to it in the same way?