betagirl
07-11-2005, 07:49 PM
This was posted in the Chicago Tribune "blog" that this putz maintains. Unfortunately I think his lack of attention span and appreciation for the sheer difficulty of riding 2200 miles in 3 weeks reflects most of the over-hyped BS going on in the US from Lance's success. Most people who are "fans" have no concept of the sport. I'm not trying to be a bike snob here, but this pissed me off:
Eric Zorn's Notebook
July 11, 2005
TOUR DE FARCE
Enough already with the Tour de France.
It happens too often -– every year -— for an event that drags on more than three weeks, but the worst part is, it’s not a proper race!
It’s a series of little races – time trials, even, in some cases – that almost completely lack the “hey, let’s all race around France and see who gets to Paris first” spirit and drama suggested by the name of the event.
It’s as though the Chicago Marathon were a bunch of 3- to 4-mile races spread out over nine days.
A real Tour de France wouldn’t have to be a Cannonball Run of crazed endurance. There could still be 21 days of racing. Each day, however, they ought to have a staggered start so that the leaders get an actual lead instead of simply a lead in the calculation of cumulative time.
This would make it difficult to impossible for “teams” of riders to work together to help their best rider, but who cares? Teams are antithetical to all forms of racing except relays.
An actual bike race around France might be interesting enough to watch every year. But unless you’re a cycling freak, the Tour now languidly unfolding is a dud that can't end soon enough for me.
Eric Zorn's Notebook
July 11, 2005
TOUR DE FARCE
Enough already with the Tour de France.
It happens too often -– every year -— for an event that drags on more than three weeks, but the worst part is, it’s not a proper race!
It’s a series of little races – time trials, even, in some cases – that almost completely lack the “hey, let’s all race around France and see who gets to Paris first” spirit and drama suggested by the name of the event.
It’s as though the Chicago Marathon were a bunch of 3- to 4-mile races spread out over nine days.
A real Tour de France wouldn’t have to be a Cannonball Run of crazed endurance. There could still be 21 days of racing. Each day, however, they ought to have a staggered start so that the leaders get an actual lead instead of simply a lead in the calculation of cumulative time.
This would make it difficult to impossible for “teams” of riders to work together to help their best rider, but who cares? Teams are antithetical to all forms of racing except relays.
An actual bike race around France might be interesting enough to watch every year. But unless you’re a cycling freak, the Tour now languidly unfolding is a dud that can't end soon enough for me.