Showing posts tagged Australian National Championships
No place for a sprinter Much is being made of the fact that because Robbie McEwen won the National title in 2005 any sprinter can win on that course. Significantly, what they neglect to also consider is the kind of year Robbie went on to have (his most successful ever) and the manner in which he won that race and who he had riding in support.In addition to winning the National title in 2005, Robbie won three stages of the Tour, three stages of the Giro (including wearing the Maglia Rosa), Paris-Brussels, three stages of the Tour Down Under, and two stages and the overall in the Bay Classic. Some year, huh? Yep, McEwen was at the absolute peak of his powers.The start list for the 2005 National race comprised only 98 elite riders (compared to 194 in 2010) and only a smattering of them were riding at the absolute top level of the sport. On the third lap these top 25 or so riders broke away with Mick Rogers the only big name to miss the break. On the 11th lap Robbie attacked taking with him team mate Cadel Evans, Paul Crake (climber) and Rob McLachlan. In the closing lap Cadel buried himself for Robbie in order to stop Crake and McLachlan attacking. Robbie then dusted them in the sprint. McLachlan 2nd and Crake 3rd. Far from a typical McEwen win.The notion that a sprinter can win on the current Buningyong course in a field of almost 200 these days is bunkum. View high resolution

No place for a sprinter

Much is being made of the fact that because Robbie McEwen won the National title in 2005 any sprinter can win on that course. Significantly, what they neglect to also consider is the kind of year Robbie went on to have (his most successful ever) and the manner in which he won that race and who he had riding in support.

In addition to winning the National title in 2005, Robbie won three stages of the Tour, three stages of the Giro (including wearing the Maglia Rosa), Paris-Brussels, three stages of the Tour Down Under, and two stages and the overall in the Bay Classic. Some year, huh? Yep, McEwen was at the absolute peak of his powers.

The start list for the 2005 National race comprised only 98 elite riders (compared to 194 in 2010) and only a smattering of them were riding at the absolute top level of the sport. On the third lap these top 25 or so riders broke away with Mick Rogers the only big name to miss the break.

On the 11th lap Robbie attacked taking with him team mate Cadel Evans, Paul Crake (climber) and Rob McLachlan. In the closing lap Cadel buried himself for Robbie in order to stop Crake and McLachlan attacking. Robbie then dusted them in the sprint. McLachlan 2nd and Crake 3rd. Far from a typical McEwen win.

The notion that a sprinter can win on the current Buningyong course in a field of almost 200 these days is bunkum.

Different routes for different riders There’s a reason that the Tour de France doesn’t just race up L’Alpe d’Huez every day for 21 days. It’s the same reason that the Giro d’Italia doesn’t race up Monte Zoncolan for three weeks. Why? Because the professional peloton is made up of riders like Mark Cavendish, Fabian Cancellara, Thomas Voekler and Cadel Evans. Riders with different physiological characteristics who are all suited to different disciplines - sprinters, time trialists, rouleurs and grimpeurs. There’s also another reason - the racing would become predictable, one note, and boring after a time.I love the fact that I can watch Cav, perfectly led out by Mark Renshaw, win on the Champs Elysses; that I can see Cancellara race and win a TT around Monaco; watch Voeckler cut loose in the Massif Central in the third week of a tour when the legs of the sprinters are tiring; and sit up late to see the fireworks as the GC favourites battle it out in the climbs of the Alps and the Pyrenees. Yes, that’s right, I don’t want to see the same type of rider win every stage of the Tour. I want to see all different kinds of racing with all the different kinds of tactics required given a chance to play out - and see the best riders in the world all get a chance to claim a Tour stage win, the most famous of victories.It’s not just the Grand Tours that recognise the need for races to have different characteristics, the one day classics also ensure there are plenty of high profile, highly sought prizes for different kinds of riders. Cav will never get over the lumps to win the Giro di Lombardia. Alberto Contador is unlikely to ever ride let alone win Milan-San Remo. We’ll never see a Schleck brother in Paris-Roubaix but they’ll always shine in Liège–Bastogne–Liège. Some riders will shine on different kinds of parcours but they’re a rare breed. Philipe Gilbert is one such rider. The recently crowned Australian National Champion Jack Bobridge may be another.The need for variety is also recognised by the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI). Each year the World Championships rotate from city to city - and the route profile changes as well. Cadel Evans won in Medrisio in 2009; gave it a real crack in Geelong in 2010 but acknowledges that Copenhagen in 2011 does not suit him and the Australian team should be built around our best sprinters. This is exactly as it should be. The other benefit to cycling more generally of this approach is that it helps grow the sport - something that is part of the UCI’s charter. Cycling fans (and potential fans) from around the world get a chance to see the best cyclists in the world race in and around the streets they ride on themselves. The huge success that was the Geelong World Championships was a massive shot-in-the-arm for cycling in Australia and it’s critical that the cycling hierarchy and promoters within Australia continue to build upon it - especially the high profile events like the Tour Down Under, the Herald Sun Tour and the National Championships.Unfortunately, when it comes to the Australian National Championships, the organisers see it completely differently. Their continued belief that the National Championships is best served by racing over the same parcours year-after-year seems both short sighted and self-indulgent. They argue that if a sprinter wants to win the National Championship then they should train harder which is patently ridiculous. I don’t care how hard Mark Cavendish trains, he is never going to win Liège–Bastogne–Liège or La Flèche Wallonne. And for the organisers of the National Championship to insult riders of the calibre of Robbie McEwen (one of Australian cycling’s great servants and one of its most winningest riders) and Mark Renshaw along these lines suggests they appear to have their own interests at heart rather than the interests of all Australian cyclists and the future of Australian cycling more generally. An Australian National Championship that rotated across two or even three different parcours seems the most logical solution. Keep the current course at Buninyong as it is perfect for the rouleurs and the grimpeurs (though the real climbers might like it even tougher). And there needs to be another course more suited to the sprinters -  a discipline that Australia has an abundance of riches in - as I for one think the likes of Matt Goss, Mark Renshaw, Brett Lancaster, Graeme Brown, Jono Cantwell or CJ Sutton would all be worthy champions. View high resolution

Different routes for different riders

There’s a reason that the Tour de France doesn’t just race up L’Alpe d’Huez every day for 21 days. It’s the same reason that the Giro d’Italia doesn’t race up Monte Zoncolan for three weeks. Why? Because the professional peloton is made up of riders like Mark Cavendish, Fabian Cancellara, Thomas Voekler and Cadel Evans. Riders with different physiological characteristics who are all suited to different disciplines - sprinters, time trialists, rouleurs and grimpeurs. There’s also another reason - the racing would become predictable, one note, and boring after a time.

I love the fact that I can watch Cav, perfectly led out by Mark Renshaw, win on the Champs Elysses; that I can see Cancellara race and win a TT around Monaco; watch Voeckler cut loose in the Massif Central in the third week of a tour when the legs of the sprinters are tiring; and sit up late to see the fireworks as the GC favourites battle it out in the climbs of the Alps and the Pyrenees. Yes, that’s right, I don’t want to see the same type of rider win every stage of the Tour. I want to see all different kinds of racing with all the different kinds of tactics required given a chance to play out - and see the best riders in the world all get a chance to claim a Tour stage win, the most famous of victories.

It’s not just the Grand Tours that recognise the need for races to have different characteristics, the one day classics also ensure there are plenty of high profile, highly sought prizes for different kinds of riders. Cav will never get over the lumps to win the Giro di Lombardia. Alberto Contador is unlikely to ever ride let alone win Milan-San Remo. We’ll never see a Schleck brother in Paris-Roubaix but they’ll always shine in Liège–Bastogne–Liège. Some riders will shine on different kinds of parcours but they’re a rare breed. Philipe Gilbert is one such rider. The recently crowned Australian National Champion Jack Bobridge may be another.

The need for variety is also recognised by the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI). Each year the World Championships rotate from city to city - and the route profile changes as well. Cadel Evans won in Medrisio in 2009; gave it a real crack in Geelong in 2010 but acknowledges that Copenhagen in 2011 does not suit him and the Australian team should be built around our best sprinters. This is exactly as it should be.

The other benefit to cycling more generally of this approach is that it helps grow the sport - something that is part of the UCI’s charter. Cycling fans (and potential fans) from around the world get a chance to see the best cyclists in the world race in and around the streets they ride on themselves. The huge success that was the Geelong World Championships was a massive shot-in-the-arm for cycling in Australia and it’s critical that the cycling hierarchy and promoters within Australia continue to build upon it - especially the high profile events like the Tour Down Under, the Herald Sun Tour and the National Championships.

Unfortunately, when it comes to the Australian National Championships, the organisers see it completely differently. Their continued belief that the National Championships is best served by racing over the same parcours year-after-year seems both short sighted and self-indulgent. They argue that if a sprinter wants to win the National Championship then they should train harder which is patently ridiculous.

I don’t care how hard Mark Cavendish trains, he is never going to win Liège–Bastogne–Liège or La Flèche Wallonne. And for the organisers of the National Championship to insult riders of the calibre of Robbie McEwen (one of Australian cycling’s great servants and one of its most winningest riders) and Mark Renshaw along these lines suggests they appear to have their own interests at heart rather than the interests of all Australian cyclists and the future of Australian cycling more generally.

An Australian National Championship that rotated across two or even three different parcours seems the most logical solution. Keep the current course at Buninyong as it is perfect for the rouleurs and the grimpeurs (though the real climbers might like it even tougher). And there needs to be another course more suited to the sprinters -  a discipline that Australia has an abundance of riches in - as I for one think the likes of Matt Goss, Mark Renshaw, Brett Lancaster, Graeme Brown, Jono Cantwell or CJ Sutton would all be worthy champions.