Home Chat General Chat

Are the pro bike courses too easy?

Just watched yesterday's coverage of the men's world series race in Budapest on BBC. Another tight duel between Beownlee & Gomez. Whilst these duels are amazingly competitive and a feature of the season, I can't help feeling that once these two are in the field in a flat city circuit then the first 2 places are a virtual foregone conclusion. But in Kitzbuehel, with its hilly bike course, we had a genuine surprise result with Stuart Hayes winning.

Would the results be less predictable with more difficult bike routes?

Would less predictabilty be good for the sport's media appeal, or is it better to have a handful of stars dominating?


  • Pro Triathlon (Olympic Distance) is sh*t FULL STOP.

    All it boils down to is who can swim and run the fastest.....

    Thats probably why I beat Will Clarke in a 10 mile TT on the bike last year....

    Shame I cant swim or run as fast as him
  • ZacniciZacnici Posts: 1,385
    I would venture that if you are a fast enough swimmer and cyclist to make it to the peleton that is enough if you are a cracking runner - don't like this draft legal stuff but it looks good on the telly for all these elites 'battling it out' seemingly to the last.

    Don't get me wrong they will all wipe most of us out but being 45 seconds slower on the swim is nothing as long they can make it into the peleton and then get their running legs on.
  • It seems like they all finish the swim and cycle around about the same time and then its a running race and the best runner wins.......still awesome athletes though
  • Is it awesome though

    I mean awesome is a strong word..... Very good maybe.... CW is awesome, macca is awesome, brownlee is awesome, Vanessa raw is awesome but the whole entity..... Not for me. I like the idea of more challenging courses.... It's just a bit contrived.

    Still - the swim and run are impressive
  • md6md6 Posts: 969
    willieverfinish wrote:
    Vanessa raw is awesome

    I think that it is all very much a tv spectacle...just designed to make the sport interesting to watch. Which i think a peloton does to some degree - as do the looped circuits, 4 or 6 laps give more change to see than one or two laps. I think that there is the problem of it remving a large chunk of the sport as we AG'ers practise it. Which i think makes it a very distance relation to 'our' sport. I think its good for the tv for people who want to see the sport, and it is ok on that front. But it isn't quite right i don't think.
  • I must admit that I also get a great sense of disappointment from the coverage on all channels. But then surely it's because watching from the side is no compensation for not competing. Like the adage that being at a football match is better than watching on telly, running down the middle of the road (first last or in between) is signifcantly better than standing in the gutter observing
  • QuitterQuitter Posts: 160
    Few here could keep with the pace of the bike leg even without the swim before hand. Ok so its not the hand to hand combat we'd like to see but a good cyclist can push the pace to reduce a better runners energy levels.
    It throws in a few tactical options for competitors....hang back and slow the pace but risk the other riders catching the group, force the pace and make a break with a few others...etc.

    Look at how Helen Jenkins broke away at the London Tri but once she saw the pack behind she slowed to ride with them......then won it! In the mens race Stuart Hayes hammered the bike leg and it caused a few to fade!
Sign In or Register to comment.