Which would you rather?

2»

Comments

  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    SteveR_100Milers wrote:
    Clearly the RR for me. Many of the track results seem to be based on who spends the most money.

    and what a load of bolloks Ian sorry. Just count the number of velodromes in France, oh and what about Japan where keirin riders are paid a sh1t load more than McHoy.

    How much money are those countries spending on their Olympic programs? Again, I refer you to the remarks of Jesper Worre. It takes money to put on a successful program, BC have been given a lot of money and get results.

    And if you think about the great unwashed out there who only really care about Olympic medals, that's a £16m spend per 4 years which = £1m per medal.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • Kléber
    Kléber Posts: 6,842
    SteveR_100Milers wrote:
    and what a load of bolloks Ian sorry. Just count the number of velodromes in France, oh and what about Japan where keirin riders are paid a sh1t load more than McHoy.
    France has two indoor velodromes that you can use properly, Bordeaux and the INSEP training track outside Paris. There are others, but they are poor quality or too short. Even so, Bordeaux isn't very good and INSEP is freezing cold, it is where the French team train and they spend their winters training with thermal gear on. They sometimes prefer the outdoor track at Hyeres on the Cote d'Azur but an outdoor track by the sea is blustery, not good for perfecting things.

    As for keirin, Japan's best riders stayed in Japan. The rider who took a bronze took a big salary cut to miss out on the real keirin races in Japan and arguably his colleagues back in Japan are better racers but they stayed behind for the money.
  • skavanagh.bikeradar
    skavanagh.bikeradar Posts: 1,097
    Hey Iain, I'd say so long as BC are getting the return on the lottery funded investment they it's fine by me! I'd like to know what failure is costing the other nations. I'm looking forward to BC continuing to be successful on the track and I'm planning to enjoy the road racing fruits of their labour in years to come. For heavens sake Cav is already rewarding the system with Giro and TdF stage wins, nowt wrong with that I'd venture.
  • unclemalc
    unclemalc Posts: 563
    Isn't it nice for a change that the very presence of decent funding has allowed the natural talent to come through and justify the cost.
    Isn't it nice for a change that its the Brits and not the Americans, the French....whoever.
    Enjoy.
    Spring!
    Singlespeeds in town rule.
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,549
    knedlicky wrote:
    I think he wimped out in the TdF. Other riders his age or younger both finished the Tour and went to China. The only reasonable excuse came from manager Stapleton, who said in one interview that Cav wasn't 'much more than a child', (which I think came over sometimes).
    How many of them had also ridden, won stages and completed the Giro too?

    Armchair experts who write daft stuff like this really get my goat - 'wimped out'. What tosh.
  • Moomaloid
    Moomaloid Posts: 2,040
    AndyP i have to agree. How many Tour debutants actually win stages and finish their first tour. Hardly any. Its a common thing for the teams to pull out their kids halfway through. 'Wimped Out' is quite possibly the most naive thing i've read on here.

    I would also like to add my backing to skavanagh.bikeradar's comments. EXACTLY!!! Who Cares!! We're getting the money for OUR sport and its about bloomin time!!
  • Jez mon
    Jez mon Posts: 3,809
    andyp wrote:
    knedlicky wrote:
    I think he wimped out in the TdF. Other riders his age or younger both finished the Tour and went to China. The only reasonable excuse came from manager Stapleton, who said in one interview that Cav wasn't 'much more than a child', (which I think came over sometimes).
    How many of them had also ridden, won stages and completed the Giro too?

    Armchair experts who write daft stuff like this really get my goat - 'wimped out'. What tosh.

    Wasn't it the British Federation who where keeping an eye on him to make sure that he didn't get too tired anyway? They should have done the same thing for Mr Wiggins :evil:
    You live and learn. At any rate, you live
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    I wold rather not compare...if I had to trust a winner, it would be Chris Hoy and in that respect his gold is worth more in my eyes than the race in beijing of that drug tainted lot that mock us and the sport each summer
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • Bronzie
    Bronzie Posts: 4,927
    iainf72 wrote:
    Many of the track results seem to be based on who spends the most money.
    You say that like it's a bad thing. Presumably, you'll soon be calling for the Tdf 2009 to be competed on identical bikes provided by the organiser (or did they already try that?).

    Money talks at every level of sport - just ask a Chelsea fan.
    It's a Lifestyle! -+-+- Coggan Training Levels
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    More proof Lionel is stalking me

    http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/The ... 65899.html

    Look dude, if you want a "bad guy" column for your magazine PM me and we can come to arrangement. You can even call call my first anti-track rant "Piste off" if you like.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • knedlicky
    knedlicky Posts: 3,097
    andyp wrote:
    Armchair experts who write daft stuff really get my goat.
    My sentiments entirely!
  • pb21
    pb21 Posts: 2,171
    The only track olympic medals I would consider close to the RR is the 4k individual pursuit and perhaps the team pursuit. The track events feel too far removed from what I like and enjoy about cycling.
    Mañana
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    can't understand you folk who reduce the importance of the events which GB riders won. Stop comparing and just be happy for them and talk them up.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • pb21
    pb21 Posts: 2,171
    I’m not reducing the importance of what’s been won. I’m just saying I would prefer the RR win. It’s like just because I would prefer to win the RR over the 100m sprint doesn’t mean I am reducing the importance of that event in the scheme of things, just to myself.
    Mañana
  • knedlicky
    knedlicky Posts: 3,097
    Moomaloid wrote:
    I would also like to add my backing to skavanagh.bikeradar's comments. EXACTLY!!! Who Cares!! We're getting the money for OUR sport and its about bloomin time!!
    Surely we're not really getting the money?
    Doesn't it go to employing a squad of riders (more than just those who went to China) to train full-time, German and Australian coaches, an American-style mental training coach, a technical ‘performance’ team, a support crew of doctors, nutritionists, and masseurs and paying for top equipment and facilities.

    The idea behind funding sport in the UK is supposed to include encouraging 0.3% of the population per year to take up or not drop out of sport, and increase people’s satisfaction with their sport experiences. I can only see that the funding for cycling reaches the sportcyclist-in-the-street if he/she uses the upgraded velodromes.
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    pb21 wrote:
    I’m not reducing the importance of what’s been won. I’m just saying I would prefer the RR win. It’s like just because I would prefer to win the RR over the 100m sprint doesn’t mean I am reducing the importance of that event in the scheme of things, just to myself.

    well....why are we making negative positive comparisons of the value of the Olymp[ic titles rather than just saying how great hoy , Wiggins, et al have done...can't get inside that fundmentally negative mindset...

    next it will be the men's RR is worth more than the womens...pointless comparisons. BRers..., pls!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • Moomaloid
    Moomaloid Posts: 2,040
    I agree Dave. Anyone saying anything negative about the GB teams achievements should just keep they're thoughts to themselves.

    Knedlicky - do u think that our track success won't get more people on their bikes? I think it will have a great effect for our sport.

    Is it years of poor performances, Drug addled sport and lack of support that has turned cyclists into miserable old Cynics? Because this always comes across.
  • DavidBelcher
    DavidBelcher Posts: 2,684
    Moomaloid wrote:
    Knedlicky - do u think that our track success won't get more people on their bikes? I think it will have a great effect for our sport.

    Agreed - more money pumped into British Cycling will have an effect at 'grass roots' given time. Patience is the key. One benefit of the track squad success already available to any old time-triallist (if you've got the dosh) through the unlikely outlet of Halfords is the road-going version of the track squad's carbon frames, as featured in C+ the other month. Lovely bike, probably goes like the clappers even when ridden by someone like me, but beyond my modest income :( [1].

    David

    [1] I guess I need a safe job in order to afford it. Not a secure job, but the sort of 'safe job' that might feature in The Sweeney. :wink:
    "It is not enough merely to win; others must lose." - Gore Vidal
  • knedlicky
    knedlicky Posts: 3,097
    Moomaloid wrote:
    Knedlicky - do u think that our track success won't get more people on their bikes? I think it will have a great effect for our sport.
    It’d be good if that happened, but studies have shown that there isn’t any lasting impact of sporting success in the general population’s sporting behaviour. People get interested and inspired but there’s a large gap between good or rashly-spoken intentions, and reality.

    I don’t remember the exact figures which studies came up with, but they were something like …
    - of every 500 people, 100 say they’re inspired enough to start or increase their sport and exercise. But for over a third of these, it’s all talk. For another third it amounts to no more than once or twice going for a jog or swim or getting on the bike for 15-20 mins, and then that’s it.
    - of the rest, 10 give up within a month, another 15 before 6 months is up, finding sport is actually work, not instant success. That leaves 5, of whom on average 4.5 would have started or increased their sport/exercise anyway, without any inspiration. So national success actually only brings 0.5 in 500, or 1 in 1000, to sport.

    Part of the problem is that there aren’t the facilities in many places. I seem to remember that when he got involved with coaching youngsters who were interested in running as a result of being inspired by one of the recent Olympics or Commonwealth Games, Linford Christie had a lot to say about the lack of facilities and of support at grassroots level, which led to those interested drifting off dismayed.

    It isn’t only a matter of facilities, there’s the distant location where the sport can be practiced or the necessary equipment expense. Here I mean sports like rowing and sailing, and also track cycling. If Olympic success easily translated to sports becoming popular, based on the last 4-5 Olympics, we’d all be out rowing for all we were worth.

    The money in preparation for the London Olympics won't go to the grassroots level either. Apart from the fact that for some sports it’s now too late to develop new talent in time for 2012, it’s already been stated it will be mainly for sports(wo)men who are already headed towards success, not to encourage teenagers to ‘get on yer bike”.

    Having said that, from what DavidBelcher says, maybe I’ll be proved wrong - by being knocked down in the High Street by a bunch of wild teenagers speeding along on carbon frames matching those the UK track squad had (and secreted out of Halfords).

Categories