Are cycling weekly stalking me?

iainf72

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/Com ... 63289.html

Why they say "some people" it's what I say.

Should I be nervous?

:P

iainf72

But anyway, they do raise some interesting points.

I'm sure we all remember how quickly the cycling medals from the last Olympics disappeared from the press as soon as there was one in athletics.

I just did a straw poll around the office and asked who knew who Boardman was. Apparantly he was "that guy with the mad bike" Nobody knew who Wiggins was.

Salsiccia

iainf72 wrote:

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/Comment_Why_Olympic_gold_is_worth_a_clutch_of_Tour_stages_article_163289.html

Why they say "some people" it's what I say.

Should I be nervous?

:P

I think it's actually you writing for Cycling Weekly once you have had acceptance for your discussion on here, and then come back on here to plug it

drenkrom

This is such a non-debate. When you win a Tour stage, you don't get to ask your equipment sponsors to make all your gear golden for the next 4 years, à la Bettini.

oldwelshman

Olympics by a mile.

sward29

"It's impossible to gauge exactly what an Olympic gold medal is worth to an individual in financial terms - no such estimates exist - but it is in the millions."

Not sure that I can agree with CW on this one. In Boardman's case this is almost certainly bo***cks. He got his contract with GAN because of the hour record in Bordeaux. Yes, the Olympics may have given him the confidence and financial backing to go for the hour but I wouldn't be so sure that it added seven figures to his bank balance. The consitent results in prologues and TT's will have done that for him.

In Wiggin's case, then maybe he has a chance of cashing in as the UK media seem to be a little more receptive to cycling nowadays, especially since no other sports are delivering the same consistent high level performances.

Mr Mclaren - take note you ginger tosspot.

afx237vi

I generally agree with the article. For Wiggins and Cavendish its a no-brainer. Wiggins has a better chance of winning another gold than a Tour stage, and Cavendish is still young enough to not worry about missing a Tour (or three).

I don't really think being a professional road rider gels with being an Olympian track rider. After all, they're being paid to do a job on the road. But if Wiggins rides the Giro, then fair enough. And maybe Cavendish could come back and try the Vuelta.

iainf72

afx237vi wrote:

I generally agree with the article. For Wiggins and Cavendish its a no-brainer. Wiggins has a better chance of winning another gold than a Tour stage, and Cavendish is still young enough to not worry about missing a Tour (or three).

Oh, I agree with that part. However, in the grand scheme of things I don't believe a gold on the track in the Olympics means that much. Same for the road TT in the Olympics.

Winning Paris-Roubaix is definaltely more prestigious IMO. It doesn't really matter what Joe Public think, the people who know about the sport are the ones who are in a position to judge. On the track, yes, I'd probably say the Olympics are the pinnacle but for cycling overall?

Bet the author would have a different take if the Americans took all comers on the track and team GB did nothing :P

muz250

Is there not road racing in the olympics??

mandie

muz250 wrote:

Is there not road racing in the olympics??

But is there a (male) British rider capable of getting anywhere near the podium?

DaveyL

Not one eligible to ride in the Olympics.

afx237vi

Hammond was what, 7th in Athens?

And did Millar ever appeal about his Olympic ban? It'll be interesting to see if Christine Ohorugu has her ban overturned. Could give him a chance if she succeeds (if he even wants it, that it).

LangerDan

afx237vi wrote:

Hammond was what, 7th in Athens?

And did Millar ever appeal about his Olympic ban? It'll be interesting to see if Christine Ohorugu has her ban overturned. Could give him a chance if she succeeds (if he even wants it, that it).

I believe the Olympic "ban" is a rule of the national bodies, rather than an IOC rule. In an interview in CW ealrier this year, Dave Brailsford was suggesting that he believed that the ban was not irrevocable.

method

LangerDan wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Hammond was what, 7th in Athens?

And did Millar ever appeal about his Olympic ban? It'll be interesting to see if Christine Ohorugu has her ban overturned. Could give him a chance if she succeeds (if he even wants it, that it).

I believe the Olympic "ban" is a rule of the national bodies, rather than an IOC rule. In an interview in CW ealrier this year, Dave Brailsford was suggesting that he believed that the ban was not irrevocable.

Its a rule of the British Olympic Commitee. While it might not be irrevocable for Ohorugu I think it would be for Millar, their offences are slightly different.

calvjones

method wrote:

LangerDan wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Hammond was what, 7th in Athens?

And did Millar ever appeal about his Olympic ban? It'll be interesting to see if Christine Ohorugu has her ban overturned. Could give him a chance if she succeeds (if he even wants it, that it).

I believe the Olympic "ban" is a rule of the national bodies, rather than an IOC rule. In an interview in CW ealrier this year, Dave Brailsford was suggesting that he believed that the ban was not irrevocable.

Its a rule of the British Olympic Commitee. While it might not be irrevocable for Ohorugu I think it would be for Millar, their offences are slightly different.

Yeah, Millar explained his :twisted: