Future of Sky Procycling

calvjones

Sorry, had to start a new thread to post my favourite cyclingnews paragraph of 2014 so far (and there have been some doozies):

'Dave Brailsford has told Cyclingnews that Team Sky will learn from the mistakes and misfortune of the 2014 Tour de France, with the British team unlikely to change its strategy, team leadership or ambitions in 2015.'



http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/brailsf ... -de-france

No_Ta_Doctor

calvjones wrote:

Sorry, had to start a new thread to post my favourite cyclingnews paragraph of 2014 so far (and there have been some doozies):

'Dave Brailsford has told Cyclingnews that Team Sky will learn from the mistakes and misfortune of the 2014 Tour de France, with the British team unlikely to change its strategy, team leadership or ambitions in 2015.'



http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/brailsf ... -de-france

That's a belter.

ddraver

Other than not falling off, what about their leadership, strategy or ambitions would you change?

Daz555

Future? Sign riders, train riders, turn up for races. Try and win.

argyllflyer

Some of the guys who write the copy at Cycling News are appallingly dreadful writers, but whether that's down to poor translations from another language or they just lack the skills for the trade, I do not know. That first sentence is contradictory and jibberish.

durhamwasp

Can't really see why they would?

Team leader: Froome
Ambitions: win the tour
Strategy: don't fall off

TimB34

argyllflyer wrote:

Some of the guys who write the copy at Cycling News are appallingly dreadful writers, but whether that's down to poor translations from another language or they just lack the skills for the trade, I do not know. That first sentence is contradictory and jibberish.

Actually I've been really impressed with some of the TdF reports on cyclingnews this year. It might be just one writer, but there's been some impressive waxing lyrical with some very apt literary allusions.

argyllflyer

TimB34 wrote:

argyllflyer wrote:

Some of the guys who write the copy at Cycling News are appallingly dreadful writers, but whether that's down to poor translations from another language or they just lack the skills for the trade, I do not know. That first sentence is contradictory and jibberish.

Actually I've been really impressed with some of the TdF reports on cyclingnews this year. It might be just one writer, but there's been some impressive waxing lyrical with some very apt literary allusions.

I'm not specifically thinking of the TdF articles to be honest, but more generally. They are consistently sloppy and don't seem to thoroughly check their copy. Whoever did the Vuelta story headline yesterday announced that the 2014 race would begin in Nimes. It was eventually changed to 2017. Sloppy is the word.

TimB34

Yes, I agree that as the de facto source of cycling information they are incredibly patchy.

From passages like this (Stage 5 report by Barry Ryan)

In Dante's Inferno, the damned are judged at the entry to the second circle of hell by Minos, who indicates their place in the underworld by circling his tail about him. On the second sector of this particular vision of hell, it was a vicious turn from Belkin's Sep Vanmarcke that decided the fate of many of the overall contenders. Nibali, Jurgen Van Den Broeck (Lotto-Belisol), Kwiatkowski and – initially – Talansky could follow, but Contador, Valverde and company were damned to spend an afternoon chasing their tails.

to this (Full report from final stage of Internationale Thüringen Rundfahrt der Frauen)

Gebhardt takes final stage over Armitstead

And their continual use of unlabelled photos from different races drives me nuts.

arran77

durhamwasp wrote:

Can't really see why they would?

Team leader: Froome
Ambitions: win the tour
Strategy: don't fall off

Froome just lacks any personality in my opinion and surely that's one of the key qualities of a leader?

r0bh

TimB34 wrote:

argyllflyer wrote:

Some of the guys who write the copy at Cycling News are appallingly dreadful writers, but whether that's down to poor translations from another language or they just lack the skills for the trade, I do not know. That first sentence is contradictory and jibberish.

Actually I've been really impressed with some of the TdF reports on cyclingnews this year. It might be just one writer, but there's been some impressive waxing lyrical with some very apt literary allusions.

You can't beat Edward Pickering for a bit of lyrical waxing, for example: http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/racing/tour-de-france/tour-de-france-stage-15-analysis-kristoff-leaves-late-130709

The Sunday results sheet will show another Tour de France bunch sprint win for Alexander Kristoff in Nimes, the lipstick of the podium girls imprinted in smudged crimson on his cheeks like stamps in hot sealing wax.

RichN95.

arran77 wrote:

durhamwasp wrote:

Can't really see why they would?

Team leader: Froome
Ambitions: win the tour
Strategy: don't fall off

Froome just lacks any personality in my opinion and surely that's one of the key qualities of a leader?

But that opinion is based on short interviews you see on TV, with him answering the same tired open ended question he's previously answered a dozen times, rather than any actual first hand experience.

above_the_cows

I think we also need to add, don't get ill to the strategy too. Of course not falling off and not getting ill are two risks that you can try and manage but really they are risks that are impossible to control completely.

OPQS

arran77 wrote:

durhamwasp wrote:

Can't really see why they would?

Team leader: Froome
Ambitions: win the tour
Strategy: don't fall off

Froome just lacks any personality in my opinion and surely that's one of the key qualities of a leader?

That and charisma. The best Leaders have that in spades.

OPQS

RichN95 wrote:

arran77 wrote:

durhamwasp wrote:

Can't really see why they would?

Team leader: Froome
Ambitions: win the tour
Strategy: don't fall off

Froome just lacks any personality in my opinion and surely that's one of the key qualities of a leader?

But that opinion is based on short interviews you see on TV, with him answering the same tired open ended question he's previously answered a dozen times, rather than any actual first hand experience.

A bad example that I'm sure someone will criticise me for using, but look at any interviews or conferences with LA. CHARISMA.

arran77

RichN95 wrote:

arran77 wrote:

durhamwasp wrote:

Can't really see why they would?

Team leader: Froome
Ambitions: win the tour
Strategy: don't fall off

Froome just lacks any personality in my opinion and surely that's one of the key qualities of a leader?

But that opinion is based on short interviews you see on TV, with him answering the same tired open ended question he's previously answered a dozen times, rather than any actual first hand experience.

Totally agree it's not based on actual first hand experience.

Others however when asked the same tired open ended questions they've previously answered a dozen times do show personality and charisma, if you can't be bothered to make the effort then step aside.

RichN95.

OPQS wrote:

A bad example that I'm sure someone will criticise me for using, but look at any interviews or conferences with LA. CHARISMA.

That was because he was a possible sociopath trying to manipulate people.

Anyone who has spent time with Froome says he's very different privately than the person you see in interviews. But that's the modern sports media for you - in the lust for controversy they have forced athletes to become very blank in front of them. You could get the most charismatic celebrity in the world, but if you get them on a chat show and proceed to accuse them of tax evasion and then asked them to talk us through a full audit, they are not going to show much personality.

Froome at this Tour is exactly the same Froome that has excelled for the last three years - but one dodgy swerve from a Belkin rider and that all seems to have been invalidated.

And as for great leaders needing great personality. Two words for you: Miguel Indurain. Even his friends say he's boring.

above_the_cows

Must. Not. Godwin. The. Thread.

RichN95.

arran77 wrote:

Others however when asked the same tired open ended questions they've previously answered a dozen times do show personality and charisma, if you can't be bothered to make the effort then step aside.

No, they don't. It's just you rarely see it in English. And they don't get asked those questions as frequently.

What, in terms of personality, it the difference between Froome this year, who in your mind is inadequate, and the one that crushed everyone last year and has won half a dozen other stage races?

OPQS

RichN95 wrote:

OPQS wrote:

A bad example that I'm sure someone will criticise me for using, but look at any interviews or conferences with LA. CHARISMA.

That was because he was a possible sociopath trying to manipulate people.

Anyone who has spent time with Froome says he's very different privately than the person you see in interviews. But that's the modern sports media for you - in the lust for controversy they have forced athletes to become very blank in front of them. You could get the most charismatic celebrity in the world, but if you get them on a chat show and proceed to accuse them of tax evasion and then asked them to talk us through a full audit, they are not going to show much personality.

Froome at this Tour is exactly the same Froome that has excelled for the last three years - but one dodgy swerve from a Belkin rider and that all seems to have been invalidated.

And as for great leaders needing great personality. Two words for you: Miguel Indurain. Even his friends say he's boring.

Then by definition how can he be great? A great Leader needs to be charismatic to encourage and convince others to do what is needed. Was he really boring? If so, can he really be considered a great Leader? Or just a great Champion? There's a distinction there some where

Macaloon

As recently as June 2013, Sky had 'solved' stage racing using the Vaughters' formula: a €600k guy leading out a €800k guy leading out... (Can't find the exact quote but this interesting thread gets close).

Then the wheels came off at the 2013 Tour, Froome's win obscuring a bizarre team performance. Seemingly persisting with the same approach has produced worse results in 2014. I doubt the other teams, reportedly scrambling to copy the Sky way, have all improved at the same rate.

So why has the dominant stage team from 2012 through the 2013 Dauphiné failed to field a competitive GT squad since the 2013 Giro? Obviously luck is involved. But I think the bigger factor is the brain drain. Losing Rogers and Yates were terrible blows.

All of which is fantastic news for the unpredictability of the sport, but a complete nightmare for Sky who now have the headache of competing with a superb Nibali and a rampant Quintana, both at least on the same level as Contador. Where will they find the road-riding smarts to completely rethink their strategy?

arran77

Macaloon wrote:

All of which is fantastic news for the unpredictability of the sport....

This is very true, and a good thing in my opinion, sport and can get very boring and stale when one team dominate and it all gets too predictable.

above_the_cows

OPQS wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

OPQS wrote:

A bad example that I'm sure someone will criticise me for using, but look at any interviews or conferences with LA. CHARISMA.

That was because he was a possible sociopath trying to manipulate people.

Anyone who has spent time with Froome says he's very different privately than the person you see in interviews. But that's the modern sports media for you - in the lust for controversy they have forced athletes to become very blank in front of them. You could get the most charismatic celebrity in the world, but if you get them on a chat show and proceed to accuse them of tax evasion and then asked them to talk us through a full audit, they are not going to show much personality.

Froome at this Tour is exactly the same Froome that has excelled for the last three years - but one dodgy swerve from a Belkin rider and that all seems to have been invalidated.

And as for great leaders needing great personality. Two words for you: Miguel Indurain. Even his friends say he's boring.

Then by definition how can he be great? A great Leader needs to be charismatic to encourage and convince others to do what is needed. Was he really boring? If so, can he really be considered a great Leader? Or just a great Champion? There's a distinction there some where

Did you not understand the part where Rich said that "Anyone who has spent time with Froome says he's very different privately than the person you see in interviews." And who says a great leader needs to be charismatic? Where is this truth written? What is 'charisma' and what is 'great leader'?

RichN95.

OPQS wrote:

Then by definition how can he be great? A great Leader needs to be charismatic to encourage and convince others to do what is needed. Was he really boring? If so, can he really be considered a great Leader? Or just a great Champion? There's a distinction there some where

The leader is the guy who has to win the race. No amount of anecdotes and soundbites are going to help you if you get dropped with 10km to go. No personality is a substitute for leading by example by winning.

mike6

The problem is the media, and some supporters, expect top sports people to be "Personalities" when in most instances they are ordinary people who have an extraordinary gift for a certain sport. Its a bit unfair to expect them to also do a stand up act when interviewed.

I could argue that Wiggins is a personality, his interviews are usually worth hearing, then others say he is a big mouth or agressive,etc etc, its perception is it not?

arran77

mike6 wrote:

I could argue that Wiggins is a personality, his interviews are usually worth hearing, then others say he is a big mouth or agressive,etc etc, its perception is it not?

Now we've found ourselves a personality 8)

RichN95.

Macaloon wrote:

Then the wheels came off at the 2013 Tour, Froome's win obscuring a bizarre team performance. Seemingly persisting with the same approach has produced worse results in 2014. I doubt the other teams, reportedly scrambling to copy the Sky way, have all improved at the same rate.

So why has the dominant stage team from 2012 through the 2013 Dauphiné failed to field a competitive GT squad since the 2013 Giro? Obviously luck is involved. But I think the bigger factor is the brain drain. Losing Rogers and Yates were terrible blows.

All of which is fantastic news for the unpredictability of the sport, but a complete nightmare for Sky who now have the headache of competing with a superb Nibali and a rampant Quintana, both at least on the same level as Contador. Where will they find the road-riding smarts to completely rethink their strategy?

In 2013 they were fine. They had some misfortunes, which they dealt with. Stage 10 was a little weird but they got through it. Porte was generally there when they needed him. Kennaugh too.
I think the problem your having is that you think that because they didn't ride in the same ultra defensive manner that they had in 2012. Froome and Wiggins are different riders so they ride in different ways for them.
As for rethinking strategy - what needs rethinking? Have better luck. That's it. Grand Tour tactics are usually pretty straightforward. The strongest rider usually wins.

Coachb

I think the stage of the Dauphine Finhaut-Emosson shows that Sky/ Froome need a new plan.
Sky's plan was for Porte to drag Froome up till the last KM at which time Froome would unleash his Kick. Contador took off a bit earlier and kicked Froomes ar%%. More of interest was the fact that Talansky rode up with the Sky Train and also beat Froome. Sky's control will not always work against riders in such form. Look at the pace of this tour. The Sky boys have been blown out of the water. The Tempo has been very fast. I would like to see a rider like Froome and Sky race a bit more on instinct. If plan A does not work then it all falls to bits. Look at Braislford at Olympics. It was all about Cav. Once he was out that was it, there was no plan b or any rider even attempting a plan B. They have vast amounts of money and resources. IMO they have also been a bit arrogant.
Status right now is ...all the gear no idea.

mike6

The future of Sky Procycling? Who knows? But you can bet it will not be as expected and will be coppied by others.

I find a lot of the anti Sky stuff on here strange. They win, and they are ruining the sport. They lose, this year, and they are rubbish, and what is the future for them? Strange indeed.

Every team has a plan and you could argue the only one that works, in retrospect, is the team that wins the Tour. What about the Saxo plan? Bertie has gone, what about there plan B eh???? no mention of that.

It would be refreshing for some members to pick on another team to disect and analyse, just to open up a discussion we have not been round and round for the last three years. Go on pick one.

arran77

mike6 wrote:

It would be refreshing for some members to pick on another team to disect and analyse, just to open up a discussion we have not been round and round for the last three years. Go on pick one.

OK, lets pick on Movistar and in particular the wheel-sucking drugs cheat, Valverde

Coachb

mike6 wrote:

The future of Sky Procycling? Who knows? But you can bet it will not be as expected and will be coppied by others.

I find a lot of the anti Sky stuff on here strange. They win, and they are ruining the sport. They lose, this year, and they are rubbish, and what is the future for them? Strange indeed.

It would be refreshing for some members to pick on another team to disect and analyse, just to open up a discussion we have not been round and round for the last three years. Go on pick one.

Ok. Garmin. A team who do ride on instinct and are happy to blow a race apart, Have some of the most talented riders yet somehow always fall a bit short at the tour. They do seem to have more than their share of bad luck.
I would say they could do a lot better.