Final Tour mark overall

wombly_knees

5.

Better than 2012, but not many other editions in recent times. Too many crapulent transition stages, a few good ones. A decent points jersey competition.

smithy21

4. Some dull sprint stages and a GC battle which promised a bit but in the end never had any drama around it.

inseine

RonB wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

3 to 4. Can't remember the last time that I've not enjoyed the TdF. Nothing really kicked off in the mountains, and I don't think that was down to Sky dominance. If Landa and Nieve are off to other teams for their own GC ambitions who's gonna fill those spots?

Poels, Kennaugh, Intxausti, Lopez, Deignan ...

Thomas, plus they've a couple of promising young climbers for 2018

kleinstroker

5/10 - mainly for lack of real excitement in GC race, the parcours led to uninspiring racing most days

timoid.

5/10. Some intersting rides, but the GC battle had zero tension.

The Vuelta might be a cracker though.

pedro118118

5, I think.

Sadly, race lost a couple of GC favourites (Valverde, Izaguirre) and two massively high-profile sprinters before it had really even got going. Then Porte, which in turn kaiboshed Martin. The race was close on paper, but at no point did I feel Froome wasn't going to win. The long flat stages were tedious, with innevitable conclusion. As a team unit, Sky were very impressive and effectively controlled the race from start to finish.

If ASO are back to the drawing board in terms of a designing a course, which is anti-Froome, they are going to have to increase the time bonuses; perhaps 20 seconds for the win?!
And ban the power meters for racing!!

jimmythecuckoo

Up until the Alps this was one of the best Tours for ages.

Yellow jersey changing hands, the favourite up against it, lots of GC contenders falling away.

But the last few days were a bit low key so I cannot award higher than a 7.

kingstongraham

7.5

Most days had some really good racing. Lost half a mark for losing Demare, Sagan, LRP, Valverde, Kittel before their races were done. The efforts of Bardet and Barguil get the race some marks back.

Nothing much of interest happened on stages 6, 10 and 19 which isn't too bad. Really enjoyed stages 9, 12, 13, 16 and 18.

imatfaal

Six and a half.

Plus
Other teams tried different tactics - which would have worked if; firstly, they had the support and secondly, if Froome team-mates hadn't been epic.
Warren Barguil getting the polka dot in the correct fashion and exhibiting a real joy in doing so.
Genuinely exciting stages in places.
I really liked ITV4 coverage - especially the wide variety of guests in London and Pippa York
Dan was mad and bad and I really wanted him on podium

Neutral
Boring transitional stages are meant to be boring

Minus
Lost four riders who I would tune in especially to watch (Hairpiece, Cav, LRP, Sagan)
That final timetrial would have been carnage in the wet; grow up ASO - steep, winding streets with bad surface and concrete walls is just turning a race against the clock into a race of nerve. The whole of the course seemed to be set up like that - with an attitude that it is the course which excites not the riders
Main contenders missing from action - Nano Quintana, Fade-io Aru, TiboPino

fat daddy

7-10

I enjoyed this years ... possibly helped by only following the 1hr a night coverage on ITV4, meaning it was a good solid hours worth of entertainment of the race, and extra bits.

being the highlights you don't get hours worth of nothing happening, if there is only one thing of interest that day, it becomes the whole of the highlights and they make it look exciting.

the only down side for me was the Sprint days, too many for my liking and dominated by one person at the start

There was a decent amount of controversy from the French rules, Excellent footage and some good attacking

I liked it ! .... 3 weeks well spent

meanredspider

Listened to a discussion on R4 today about Froome which kinda summed it up for me. The two guests agreed that Sky just took control and did just enough to maintain control.

I found the whole thing terminally dull. Kittel was the only person who seemed to add some true individual flair and the cherry on that cake was his bike (the story being that there was no story).

3/10 without Kittel - 5/10 with.

kingstongraham

meanredspider wrote:

Listened to a discussion on R4 today about Froome which kinda summed it up for me. The two guests agreed that Sky just took control and did just enough to maintain control.

I found the whole thing terminally dull. Kittel was the only person who seemed to add some true individual flair and the cherry on that cake was his bike (the story being that there was no story).

3/10 without Kittel - 5/10 with.

You don't think Barguil or Matthews brought anything?

joe2008

meanredspider wrote:

I found the whole thing terminally dull. Kittel was the only person who seemed to add some true individual flair and the cherry on that cake was his bike (the story being that there was no story).

3/10 without Kittel - 5/10 with.

Have you tried golf?

meanredspider

joe2008 wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

I found the whole thing terminally dull. Kittel was the only person who seemed to add some true individual flair and the cherry on that cake was his bike (the story being that there was no story).

3/10 without Kittel - 5/10 with.

Have you tried golf?

I might next time the Tour is on if this continues! As much as I detest golf, I'd rather be doing anything than watching something so dull. As it is, I'm a captive so even the dull would have been interesting. This wasn't. Despite it being the narrowest lead, Froome never looked under threat at any point. The biggest stories of the Tour seemed to be those that failed to achieve - that tells you all you need to know.

kingstongraham

meanredspider wrote:

joe2008 wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

I found the whole thing terminally dull. Kittel was the only person who seemed to add some true individual flair and the cherry on that cake was his bike (the story being that there was no story).

3/10 without Kittel - 5/10 with.

Have you tried golf?

I might next time the Tour is on if this continues! As much as I detest golf, I'd rather be doing anything than watching something so dull. As it is, I'm a captive so even the dull would have been interesting. This wasn't. Despite it being the narrowest lead, Froome never looked under threat at any point. The biggest stories of the Tour seemed to be those that failed to achieve - that tells you all you need to know.

And Kittel was different because....?

joe2008

meanredspider wrote:

joe2008 wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

I found the whole thing terminally dull. Kittel was the only person who seemed to add some true individual flair and the cherry on that cake was his bike (the story being that there was no story).

3/10 without Kittel - 5/10 with.

Have you tried golf?

I might next time the Tour is on if this continues! As much as I detest golf, I'd rather be doing anything than watching something so dull. As it is, I'm a captive so even the dull would have been interesting. This wasn't. Despite it being the narrowest lead, Froome never looked under threat at any point. The biggest stories of the Tour seemed to be those that failed to achieve - that tells you all you need to know.

Nice reply.

jimmythecuckoo

So sad that you spent so much time watching something you didn't enjoy.

I hope the Vuelta makes you feel better.

rick_chasey

meanredspider wrote:

joe2008 wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

I found the whole thing terminally dull. Kittel was the only person who seemed to add some true individual flair and the cherry on that cake was his bike (the story being that there was no story).

3/10 without Kittel - 5/10 with.

Have you tried golf?

I might next time the Tour is on if this continues! As much as I detest golf, I'd rather be doing anything than watching something so dull. As it is, I'm a captive so even the dull would have been interesting. This wasn't. Despite it being the narrowest lead, Froome never looked under threat at any point. The biggest stories of the Tour seemed to be those that failed to achieve - that tells you all you need to know.

Honestly, try the highlights!

meanredspider

KingstonGraham wrote:

And Kittel was different because....?

Only because he was awesome. Even that got predictable after a while. There's a bunch of teams bringing there lead-out men and sprinters up to the front. But where's Kittel? Oh, here he comes "surfing" up on his own. Bam. All over. Even he had the good grace to do one dead heat that made it slightly more interesting for a few minutes...

meanredspider

Rick Chasey wrote:

Honestly, try the highlights!

I did.

In the end I took to tuning in for the last 1km - like watching the goals on the evening news.

rick_chasey

Ah, not the sport for you then!

FocusZing

meanredspider wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Honestly, try the highlights!

I did.

In the end I took to tuning in for the last 1km - like watching the goals on the evening news.

What about the châteaus, horses, cows, clocks, rivers, fields, mountains, disc brakes...?

kingstongraham

meanredspider wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

And Kittel was different because....?

Only because he was awesome. Even that got predictable after a while. There's a bunch of teams bringing there lead-out men and sprinters up to the front. But where's Kittel? Oh, here he comes "surfing" up on his own. Bam. All over. Even he had the good grace to do one dead heat that made it slightly more interesting for a few minutes...

So Kittel's days were good because of awesomeness in the last minute (5), no one can deny stages 9, 13, 16 were entertaining, surely? Sagan's win when his foot came out of the pedal? Demare's sprint win with Sagan being thrown out? Matthews beating GVA and Aru losing time? Bardet and Aru beating Froome on two mountaintop finishes? Barguil crowning the polka dots on Izoard? Paris? Not a dull end to any of those, and that makes over two thirds of the stages.

meanredspider

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ah, not the sport for you then!

Yes and no. I'm not much of a spectator at the best of times - I'd always rather be playing the sport than watching it. That's not easy whilst I'm looking after my daughter so I'm a captive audience. I just felt that the overall result was always in Sky's control and the results of individual days was pretty unexciting. Sky dominate the Tour in a way that they don't bother in other events. It's impressive but ultimately boring,

As much as there are those that disagree with me, my score of 5/10 isn't that wide of the concensus distribution.

meanredspider

KingstonGraham wrote:

Sagan's win when his foot came out of the pedal? Demare's sprint win with Sagan being thrown out?

Just two examples of where failure made the Tour interesting.

meanredspider

FocusZing wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Honestly, try the highlights!

I did.

In the end I took to tuning in for the last 1km - like watching the goals on the evening news.

What about the châteaus, horses, cows, clocks, rivers, fields, mountains, disc brakes...?

Even disc brakes couldn't make it interesting after the first couple of wins

My brother used to farm in the Loire valley - I've had my fill of French farming and chateaux too

rick_chasey

meanredspider wrote:

FocusZing wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Honestly, try the highlights!

I did.

In the end I took to tuning in for the last 1km - like watching the goals on the evening news.

What about the châteaus, horses, cows, clocks, rivers, fields, mountains, disc brakes...?

Even disc brakes couldn't make it interesting after the first couple of wins

Still fairly sure Kittel didn't use them on anything but the flattest days...

inseine

meanredspider wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ah, not the sport for you then!

Yes and no. I'm not much of a spectator at the best of times - I'd always rather be playing the sport than watching it. That's not easy whilst I'm looking after my daughter so I'm a captive audience. I just felt that the overall result was always in Sky's control and the results of individual days was pretty unexciting. Sky dominate the Tour in a way that they don't bother in other events. It's impressive but ultimately boring,

As much as there are those that disagree with me, my score of 5/10 isn't that wide of the concensus distribution.

Your opinion is totally valid, and lots of people agree with your comment 'overall result was always in Sky's control ', it's just to me I enjoy each moment of each individual stage. The overall result is a function of that but not why I like or don't like watching it. It was fascinating watching the early breaks forming even though you knew they'd probably be reeled in and woudn't in any way influence the overall result.

kingstongraham

meanredspider wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Sagan's win when his foot came out of the pedal? Demare's sprint win with Sagan being thrown out?

Just two examples of where failure made the Tour interesting.

Sagan really didn't fail on that stage.

meanredspider

Rick Chasey wrote:

Still fairly sure Kittel didn't use them on anything but the flattest days...

All the ones he won, you mean?