Le Tour de France: My Overall Conclusions

Well, the Tour is over for another year and once again the cream rose to the top.  Chris Froome won the GC battle with room to spare, a winning margin of over 4mins between himself and his nearest rival who came in the somewhat unexpected shape of French rider, Roman Bardet (AG2R Mondiale).  If Froome had been widely tipped to win his 3rd Tour prior to it's onset, then Bardet would have been equally unfancied to have been standing next to him on the podium in Paris!  Bardet had been rumoured to have been on the verge of hitting the 'big-time' for a few years now, but few would have predicted (before the Tour started) that he would finish ahead of all the other big names in the field, men like Quintana, Valverde, Porte and Aru, who many (me included) thought would be pushing Froome to ever greater heights in his pursuit of his 3rd Tour victory.  In the end all of the expected challengers fell by the wayside, either unwilling or unable to take the battle to Froome and his relentless Team Sky teammates, leaving the way clear for newcomers like Bardet and Adam Yates (Orica BikeExchange) to leave their stamp on the race.

Chris Froome & the unstoppable Team Sky train reach Paris

If Adam Yates was the new sensation of the Tour, then Bardet was surely the. man who came of age.  His amazing stage win in last years Tour had singled him out as (potentially) the next French Grand Tour challenger, but after so many years of waiting and so many disappointments and nearly men, perhaps we all expected that Bardet, like Rolland, Pinot, Jalabert and Virenque before him (the list goes on), would not fulfil his promise.  But we were wrong.  Unlike the many French nearly men of recent times, Bardet seems to have mastered the ability to ride consistently well.  His improvement has been gradual and regular (e.g. in the Criterium du Dauphine - the big pre-Tour event, won in each of his 3 Tour winning years by Froome - Bardet has finished 12th in 2013; 5th in 2014; 6th in 2015 and 2nd this year) exhibiting much more consistency than that of other French riders who can be brilliant on their day, but then lack the resilience to back it up with a consolidating ride the day after, and the day after that, as is needed if one is to make ones mark on a Grand Tour these days.  Even bad days have to be mastered and losses minimised (as Froome has shown so brilliantly in each of his wins) if one is to come out on top.  A bad day might mean digging deep and limiting ones losses to a couple of minutes, and no more, and Bardet seems to have got this straight in his head and does not leave so much of himself out on the course on one day so that on the next he cannot keep up his challenge.

So whilst not many would have expected Bardet to have finished the 2016 in 2nd place, it wasn't entirely a shock result either.  As to whether he can mount a more serious challenge to Froome next year we will have to wait and see.  With all due respect, I have to say that if it his his aim to win the Tour (and why wouldn't it be?) then remaining at AG2R is perhaps a no-no!

Froome and Team Sky have moved the sport on in the last few years, revolutionising the way things are done in terms of preparation, tactics, planning and professionalism, facts that are beginning to be acknowledged and taken note of within the peleton and team management of their rivals.  Sure Sky have the largest budget, but it's more than that; it's about getting things done in the correct way.  It's about eating right, warming down properly after a long day in the saddle, surveying routes (all of them) and riding them beforehand so there are no surprises en route, and it's about being single-minded in the pursuit of the team's goals (whatever they may be) and making sure everyone in the team (from dietitians, therapist, domestiques and team leaders) is on the same page, working towards the same ends with same dedication and drive as the man who will eventually gain most of the plaudits, and these things are not about money, they are about how much you want it and how much everyone about you wants it.  And perhaps AG2R are still stuck in the glory days of Hinault and all that heady French success to be able to push Bardet to surmount that final step.

I think to mount a serious challenge to Froome, Bardet will have to move to a bigger team, one that is also on an upward trend like himself, and who is looking to emulate Team Sky, but in their own way, by making their own mark.  The more established teams I think will struggle to make the necessary changes in a quick and efficient manner, just because they have been in the mire for longer, and so I believe Bardet should look to one of the newer teams (like Orica or even a Team DiData) who are perhaps a bit more open to shaking things up in order that he can take that next step and give the French what they have waited so long for, a French grand tour winner.

As for Adam Yates, he rode a truly remarkable Tour and, as a fellow Brit, I have to hope that it is not a flash in the pan and we have another British grand tour contender in the making.  I love his attitude; the way he took it all his stride with dignity, a smile and that steely determination that only a few possess.  I do believe that Adam, and perhaps his brother Simon too, will go onto win grand tours because, like Bardet, his rise has been steady, consistent and constantly on an up, and at the age of 23 one has to think there is much, much more to come since most tour winners don't start to reach their physical peaks until their mid- to late 20's.  If he can stay (relatively) injury free, keep progressing and maintain the positive outlook then I have every hope that he will go on to make his mark like Wiggins and Froome before him, as British tour winners.

Other 2016 Tour successes are undoubtedly Peter Sagan, Mark Cavendish, Tom Dumoulin, Greg van Avermaet, Jarlinson Pantano and Thomas de Gendt, whilst my big Tour disappointments are Nairo Quintana, Fabio Aru and Thibaut Pinot.

Sagan was unstoppable in so many ways; 3 stage wins, his 5th green jersey, his 1st yellow jersey, countless breakaways and relentless domestique on occasions, he is arguably the most complete cyclist of his (and perhaps any) generation and deserves all the plaudits he receives.  Cav came storming back to take a truly amazing 4 stage wins taking him to 2nd on the all time list of Tour stage winners, confirming himself as the top sprinter in this years race and letting everyone, me included, know that he is far from finished.

Tom Dumoulin, with 2 stage wins including the first long TT, once again singled himself out as the man to beat in any TT (now that Tony Martin and Fabian have had their days) as well as in any one off races, be they a classic or otherwise.  As to whether he can convert himself into a grand tour contender we still don't know, but nevertheless he is an exciting and unpredictable rider who adds a great deal to any race.

van Avermaet (BMC) I have included not only because of his stage victory (S5) but because of the fight and panache he showed to keep the yellow jersey once he'd got hold of it!  Jarlinson Pantano and Thomas de Gendt were both unbelievably aggressive riders throughout, both winning stages and, like Sagan, appearing in countless breakaways demonstrating breathtaking resilience and fight whenever challenged.  In this regard Julien Alaphilippe also deserves an honourable mention but didn't quite manage to get himself that all important stage win.

And finally there was Quintana, Aru and Pinot, all of whom had specifically targeted this years Tour as the race for them, and all of whom, for whatever reason, were found wanting.  In the end there are no excuses and none of them performed to their best on any single occasion and as such, left the door open for others to lead the challenge to Froome's dominance.  Maybe next year guys.....!

Overall, it was a great Tour de France, if not in terms of the yellow jersey race, which to be honest Froome never looked losing once he got hold of it, but in the quality and excitement of each of the days racing which seems to become of a higher quality each passing year!  In 2017 can Froome come back to do it again?  Well, you wouldn't bet your house on him not doing it!  He now heads off to Rio and then to the Vuelta (where incidentally he'll be racing quite close by to me for a couple of days....can't wait!) at the end of August and one wouldn't get long odds on him winning both of those either!  But it's already been a long season for Froomey and the Vuelta, like before, might prove to be a step too far!

But here's hoping.....!  Come on Froomey!!

Le Tour de France; Week 2 Review

Do you know how sometimes you commit to something and then almost immediately wish you hadn't? Well, this weekly review is one of those things! Whilst the tour is on it's 3 weeks of afternoons that are blocked out 100% as I absorb every twist, turn, crash and sprint of the world's best bike race. So when the rest days come along I just find I've got loads of stuff to catch up on, none of which I generally manage to get done completely, and then I add to the load by deciding to do a review the tour which inevitably ends up being a rush job at best! Nevertheless, the tour is, as always, totally absorbing and so it's no great chore to think about it that bit more!

So here we go!

Don't know about you, but I've found this year's race to be a bit short on drama thus far when it comes to the pursuit of the various jersey's. The polka dot (KOM) is all but Rafa Majka's; the green (points) jersey has been tied since the first days by the irrepressible Peter Sagan; the white (young rider) jersey looks to be tied up by Britain's Adam Yates despite the attentions of Louis Meintjes and the yellow (GC) jersey by Team Sky's Chris Froome who looks all but impregnable.

That's not to say that any, if not all of these jersey's aren't going to be fought over in the final week, because they will be; here's how I see them panning out.

The fight for the King of the Mountains will be, I predict, between Rafa Majka (Tinkoff), Thomas de Gendt (Lotto) and Danny Navarro (Cofidis) but, barring any unforeseen disasters or accidents, I think Majka is too strong for the others and will win out with Navarro second.

The points jersey is the one that is now beyond doubt since the departure of Mark Cavendish yesterday to prepare for the Olympic Madison event with young Bradley Wiggins!

The best young rider jersey should remain firmly on the shoulders of Adam Yates (Orica Bike Exchange) who has shown himself well capable of staying with the best climbers in the world the past 2 weeks.  Whilst he might not be in shape (this year) to attack his wallflower approach of hanging onto the coattails of the best climbers may well see him reach Paris in a podium position.

And the most prestigious overall winners yellow jersey will I think stay on the shoulders of Froomey who has shown himself to be the man most likely the past 2 weeks.  Team Sky are so strong, with Wout Poels and Sergio Henao in particular, showing great fortitude in the climbs, that they have literally rode the sting out of the other GC contenders.  The only main GC rider to have shown any force of will to attack so far is the man already in yellow.  Everyone talks of Froome's struggles in the final week of his two previous tour victories, but in both of those wins he had attacked on mountain stages in the first two weeks in order to open a big enough gap to cushion any losses in the final weeks climbs.  This year however, his major strength has been his racing brain and the courage to put himself on the line in order to seize opportunities as they presented themselves and to take the race to his rivals in a completely novel way to that seen before.  Froome's armoury now appears to be replete, whereas previously people had questioned his ability to descend, for one, and his reticence to leave the security of his team-mates shelter for one more, both of which he has ably demonstrated to be no longer the case, and all of this without having put in his customary mountain attack, as yet.  Thus I confidently predict that Froome's usual 3rd week difficulties will be minimised, if not totally distanced, this year.

His main rivals, Bauke Mollema (Trek Segafredo), Nairo Quintana and Alejandro Valverde (Movistar), Adam Yates and Richie Porte (BMC) have all shown an inability to shake Froome when they have attacked, either due to the relentless pace set by Sky or because they are intimidated by Froome's new found racing strengths this year.  Either way, if anyone is going to shift Froome from yellow they need to put themselves on the line and show the same desire to win that Froome, himself, has already demonstrated.  However, I think Wednesday will see Froome attacking and putting yet more time into his rivals.

Now I'm out of time because it's already Wednesday and the stage is underway!

Enjoy!

Is Andy Murray the Greatest British Sports Star Ever?

On the face of it, deciding if Andy Murray is the greatest British Sports Star ever was a relatively easy question to answer.  For me the answer is a resounding 'yes'!

No doubt there would be many out there who would disagree.  There are of course many outstanding candidates.  The two biggest hurdles though in examining a question such as this is how do you possibly compare individuals (even if they competed in the same sporting arena) across generations and secondly, across sporting fields?  And in truth, there is no viable comparative method that enables one to do so with any sort of validity; it really is a matter of one's own perception of a particular sport as well as cross-generational, sporting prowess, and my perception may be vastly different to the next guy's, and one can really only have an opinion if one has been around long enough to witness sporting achievement across generations and across various sporting arenas.  For example, I can't reasonably compare Andy Murray to Fred Perry, except on paper, simply because I didn't see Fred Perry play.  But what I can say for sure is that the game Perry played might be, in theory the same game that Murray now plays, but in practice they are vastly different.

Andy Murray winning this years Wimbledon Men's Singles

To be blunt, if not controversial for a second, when Perry played tennis was a game that was played by an elite minority.  It certainly wasn't a game that Andy Murray, had he been around in the 1930's, would probably have had a chance to play, let alone play often enough to be able to gain any sort of prowess.  He just wouldn't have had access to the courts, the money or the opportunities.  So tennis back then was a competition between (for want of a better word) gentlemen and so the level of competition, though undoubtedly high for the time, was limited by comparison.  That said, a player in any generation can only beat those against whom he competes and Fred Perry was thus, a great Champion, but that was then and he remains a Champion of the times and his talent, no matter how great, cannot be compared to that of Murray who competes in a world very different from that inhabited by Perry.  The levels of competition and professionalism that the best tennis players in the world have to achieve now is immense and literally bears no comparison to generations past, thus for me at least, Murray's achievement's in winning 3 Grand Slams (2 of course at Wimbledon now) in the modern game is a simply mind boggling feat and far superior to that of (with all due respect) Perry, especially given that Murray has been I would suggest, up against (arguably) the greatest players in the world of this or any other generation, namely Roger Federer, Raphael Nadal and Novak Djokovic.

It is hard to imagine there will ever be such a generation of greats in tennis or for that matter, any other sport, who will all be around at the same time with such rampant success.  At any other time time Murray would surely have won more than 3 Slams had he not had the misfortune (?) to be at the top his game at the same time as perhaps the three greatest players of all time.  This as much as anything leads me to say Murray is the greatest British star of all time.

But what of other modern British sports stars, and there are many to choose from across a wide range of sports, all of whom rightly deserve similar accolades for their sporting achievements.  Stars such as Steve Redgrave (rowing), Chris Hoy, Bradley Wiggins, Chris Froome, Vicky Pendleton (cycling), Lester Piggott, Tony McCoy (horse racing), Joe Calzaghe (boxing), Mo Farah, Seb Coe, Paula Radcliffe (athletics), Bobby Moore, Bobby Charlton (football), Adam Peaty (swimming), Jackie Stewart, Lewis Hamilton, Barry Sheene (motor sport), Ben Ainslie (sailing) are just some of whom one might consider in competition with Murray and all of whom, for one reason or another, I discounted.   Here's why....

Mo Farah

When considering this question I considered various criteria and within those various interim factors:

• longevity (level of achievement over time, consistency, competition over time)
• sporting arena (team sport or individual; injury risk)
• place in the British sports fans psyche (i.e. level of attachment or emotion) 

In considering sporting longevity (or success over time) one has to adjust ones expectations for particular sports; for example, in swimming for example, competitors usually come to the fore at a relatively young age (i.e. late teens, early 20's) and may have a career that lasts 10 years if they are truly lucky, whereas a jockey may begin at a similar age but can reasonably be expected to continue for double that time, sometimes longer, therefore in terms of sporting longevity expectations needs to be adjusted accordingly.

Ben Ainslie

In examining various sporting arenas and the success of competitors within that sphere one needs to look at different aspects of each sport and thus, each sporting star.  For example, in football it is relatively easy to determine who a great player is (and who is not) and to determine their level of success, but since it is a team game can one reasonably say that a great player would have been rated so if the team about him was not also a large part of the equation?  By that I mean, Leo Messi is arguably the greatest of all time, but would he have achieved the same levels of recognition and success had he not had an Iniesta, a Javi, a Puyol, etc playing alongside him?  So success in a team game is to a (larger) extent dependent upon the other members of the team than in say boxing, or tennis, where performance is purely down to the individual.  That is not to say that boxers and tennis players don't have teams because they do, but in the end the performance is down to the individual.

In some sports as well the chances of sustaining an injury (serious, career-ending or otherwise) are (arguably) more likely than in others; a boxer for example, is far more likely to sustain injuries than say an oarsman/woman during competition, and in motor sports those injuries may not just threaten a career but also the competitors life.  Would Ayrton Senna have gone on to become the greatest driver of all time had he not lost his life so tragically and so young?  But then a racing driver is far less likely to sustain a torn hamstring during training than say an athlete, so risk assessments across sports are very difficult to make and, I would argue, highly subjective.  

 

The final part of my analysis concerns a sports stars place in the British sports fans hearts, or how attached the public becomes to an individual.  For example, David Beckham is perhaps one of the most popular and loved British sports stars of all time, in spite of, relatively speaking, only limited success on the pitch. Whereas Chris Froome, a naturalised Brit born in Kenya, will have to work much harder to gain a foothold in the public's hearts, despite having won the Tour de France twice and may yet go on to become one of the greatest grand tour riders of all time.

Bradley Wiggins in Tour winners yellow jersey.

And so I come down to my selection process.  Despite all the wonderful names above only a few leapt out at me as possible contenders for the title of Britain's greatest sports star.  They were Steve Redgrave, Ben Ainslie, Bradley Wiggins, Mo Farah and of course, Andy Murray.

Taking each in turn I shall give the reason why they didn't make my final cut.  Steve Redgrave I discounted because his success was to a lesser or greater extent dependent upon his team members without whom he may not have achieved such recognition.  Mo Farah, who according to Brendan Foster is the greatest, I discounted because despite all of his success I believe greatness in athletics is largely measured by the number of records he breaks, and rightly or wrongly, Mo has always been a pure racer motivated by medals and not times, and so in my mind has never scaled the heights that he perhaps might have.  Ben Ainslie has never gained the place in British hearts that other sports stars may have simply because sailing is not perhaps an ideal spectator sport and so public recognition has passed him by somewhat.  And to a lesser extent the same may be true of Bradley Wiggins who (in my reckoning came a very close second to Andy and) has never gained the public recognition I believe he deserves because cycling, as a TV sport is not as viewer friendly as say tennis.

Wiggins is, however, in my opinion the greatest cyclist Britain has produced.  The range of his successes is truly staggering reaching across a multitude of track events at both Worlds and Olympics, as well as untold success on the roads culminating in his 2011 success in becoming the first British winner of the Tour de France and all this stretching over an international career that has lasted almost 20 years and is still ongoing.

But in the end he will never gain the same place in British hearts as Andy Murray simply because tennis is a much more approachable and armchair friendly sport than say an individual time trial event!

So by process of elimination I come to the inevitable conclusion that Andy Murray is the greatest sports star that Britain has ever produced.

What do you think?  Am I right or wrong?

Le Tour de France: My fun look at the first week!

Ok, so the first week of Le Tour is done and dusted, and what have we discovered, if anything?  As always, at this relatively early stage there are more questions than answers, but I'm going to have a go at trying to answer a few of the more pertinent ones that have jumped out at me!  As well as that I'm going to dish out my 1st week awards - good and bad - and try to make a few precarious predictions as to where this years race might be headed!

So where do we start?  Of course, we start with the main man and that man this week has been Britain's Chris Froome.

Well, Chris is well placed, in yellow where he likes to be, but does he look as strong as he has done at this stage in 2013 & 2015 when he won his first two overall victories?

That's a hard one.  On the face of it one might be tempted to suggest that his position is precarious by comparison to 2013 & 15.  At this stage in 2013 he had a lead of 2m2s and in 2015 1m59s over Colombian ace Nairo Quintana, the man most people expect to be his main rival once again.  So by pure numbers it's easy to suggest that Froomey is struggling and is set for a big fall come the high Alps in the final week of the race.  In both of his Tour wins Froomey has hit the first week hard, and in particular the Pyrenees, where he has typically opened significant time gaps over Quintana and his other main rivals.  This year however, although he did win Saturdays mountain stage it was only by a matter of seconds and not the minutes that perhaps we are used to seeing.  Does this mean that he is on the back foot already and has only way to go as the Tour rages on - backwards?

I don't think so!  If you listen to Chris speak, as well as how Dave 'the Maestro' Brailsford talks about him, I think it's fair to say that the 2016 version of Chris Froome is a much more relaxed, chilled and realistic animal.  If it's possible at 31 years of age, I think Chris has finally grown into his role as a (budding) cycling legend and seems to be able to handle the stresses, strains and demands of being the Tour favourite in a much better manner than perhaps we've seen previously.  He himself has pointed to his normally dominant first week and must be fully aware of the relative disparity in the comparative time gaps this year and the potential consequences as the race develops.  But Team Sky are also a very different animal this year compared with their previous winning years with both Froomey and initially Wiggins (in 2012) when the Sky train was all dominant and, despite all the success, gained only scorn amongst sections of the press (particularly in France) for the manner of their victories.  However, this year Team Sky have also grown into their role as (arguably) the top team at this years tour.  The Sky train is still there, but it is no longer the rigid (and boring?) locomotive that we've seen before.  The development of Brailsford's Team Sky and by proxy, Chris Froome, has come about as a result of their experiences over the past few years.  Their learning curve has been steep indeed, and one would be hard pressed to suggest that they haven't taken on board any of the lessons learned since the team's inception in 2010.

We saw the first indications that the 2016 version of Team Sky was perhaps somewhat different from previous versions in the Dauphine where the riders seemed to have much freedom to explore their own races whilst still maintaining the basic remit of protecting their team leader, Froomey, and winning the day, which they duly did.  The evolution of the team and it's riders has continued this week with riders appearing in breakaways as well as adopting different tactics in the early mountain stages where Sergio Henao, for example, has certainly been given his head to try and ride his own race, in stark contrast to 2011 when Froome was held back under team orders to guide eventual winner, Bradley Wiggins, over the high Alps.

Criticisms of Froomey being a boring, robotic rider in previous years have surely been laid to rest this year after his extravagant downhill attack and eventual stage win in Saturday's stage, if not by his elbowing of a Colombian fan who got too close on the ascent!  I think Chris is riding well within himself and has preserved his legs (relatively) and energies for what is still to come.

The first week has seen the peleton cover just over half the distance of this years Tour, some 1769kms.  The coming week features 2 more mountain stages, including on Thursday a mountain top finish of the legendary Mont Ventoux and on Friday the first of this years TT's, which is a longish, relatively hilly day with an uphill gradient to finish, all of which should suit Froomey well.  Whilst Quintana has undoubtedly improved his time-trialling the 37.5km TT should see Froome putting a bit more time into Quintana.  The big test though will surely come on the ascent of Mont Ventoux where we can reasonably expect Quintana and the other GC contenders to all have a bash at taking Froomey's crown!  However, Ventoux is a climb Froomey knows well having won there in 2013 on the way to his first overall victory.  If he does make the first move on Thursday I can see him running the show again and stretching his lead further over a somewhat reticent 2016 Quintana.

One would think that if Quintana truly has designs on this years Tour he would need to attack early on on Mont Ventoux to try and test Froome's endurance to it's max.  But I've sensed a certain reluctance in Quintana so far to really put himself on the line, for example on Saturday when he failed to chase Froome down, despite being on his wheel, as they topped the mountain and instead he sat up and waited for Valverde to arrive before he began his chase.  Does that indicate a lack of confidence in his own ability?  Or maybe he's not sure of his own physical capabilities coming into this years Tour having not raced for some time, despite successes earlier in the year when he beat Froome (e.g. Tour of Romandie).  Maybe that lack of racing the past few months will be telling in the final wash?  Or maybe I'm reading too much into it all and he's really is just biding his time.  By the end of this week we shall all know a lot more.

But what of the rest of the peleton?

Froome aside, the other big stories this week are perhaps also British.  The return to form, after a seemingly long absence, of Mark Cavendish with 3 fantastic wins this week.  Cav's post race interviews are always a mix of emotion, angst, muttered phrases and either beaming smiles or black scowls, but they are always entertaining!  If I, for one, had been doubting Cav's ability to get back to his best after a long performance hiatus, then it must be said that Cav himself never shared in those doubts and is now perhaps as good as he's ever been and has, this week, overtaken Bernard Hinault's total Tour victories with a staggering 29 wins!  He has more chances this week, though with the Olympics just round the corner one has to question whether we will see Cav racing all the way to the Champs Elysees this year.

Britain's other big successes this week have been Fridays amazing mountain stage win by 35 year old youngster Steve Cummings of Team Dimension Data (Cav's team) and the second placing overall (some 16secs behind Froomey) and white jersey holder (best young rider) of Adam Yates (Orica Bike Exchange)!  Cummings win was arguably the best and biggest win of his career and comes at a time when most are digging out their pipe and slippers but Cummings, bucking the trend, just seems to be getting better and better!  Has he found the secret of eternal youth I ask?  And so for Cummings this week I give the Never Say Die Award which is also known as the Cher 'I can turn back time' Award!

At 23 years old and being well into the final year of his contract at Orica Adam Yates is probably this years hot young thing and must have new offers of employment filling his inbox every morning!  His form so far this Tour has been quite staggering given that his chin is a mass of stitches after the inflatable flamme rouge collapsed on top of him during Friday's stage!  He has managed to stick with all the big guns in the mountains so far, however, it must be said without setting the peleton on fire.  Nevertheless, he could well be Britain's next grand tour winner (after Froome) in the making and for this reason I award him the Week One Hottie Award, an honour he is sure to live up to in the coming fortnight!

Other winners and losers this week include the Evergreen Peter Sagan (evergreen because he is destined to spend the rest of the Tour in green) who can surely gain worthwhile employment, once his cycling career is over, as a cartoon voice-over character; Alberto Contador, who followed up a very heavy fall on the opening day by trying to outdo himself the next day by tumbling over again, and in the end abandoned the race during Sunday's stage.  Contador's days of challenging the best during the grand tours are now probably behind him and if he decides to continue next year (perhaps with the new Bahrain team) then it may well be in more of a support role!  BMC's Richie Porte also had his share of bad luck losing time on his GC rivals with a mechanical failure some 5kms out during Monday's (I think!) stage and his chances of pushing for overall victory seemed to have dissipated in the process!  Marcel Kittel, who looked so great earlier in the year, looks a bit below par but still managed to win Tuesday's stage ahead of Sagan, but does look to be second best this year to a rejuvenated Cav!  Andre Griepel has been way off the pace despite having had good lead out trains for most of the sprint stages and is languishing in the sprinters wilderness right now!  Best Newcomer Award goes to British sprinter Dan McClay riding in his first Tour and who has managed to finish in the top 10 of every sprint stage thus far!  Keep it up Dan!  And talking of Dan's, it wouldn't be right to finish without giving a mention to Ireland's Dan Martin who is showing that maybe he does have the makings of a GC contender after all.  The Etix man is running hotter than ever after finishing to second in last month's Dauphine and finally seems to demonstrating that he has the confidence to stick with and even attack the top GC guys in the high mountains.  But for both him and Adam Yates, the final's weeks high Alps tests will be the true test of their mettle and will show whether they really can compete with the very best over a 3 week grand tour!

Ok, I'll be back next week with another round up of Tour news!  In the meantime, enjoy this weeks racing and get on your bike!

A Personal Tribute: Muhammad Ali

I woke up this morning to the saddest of news, something that by now we are all aware of; the passing of Muhammad Ali.  This is my own personal tribute to an amazing man.

Throughout my life my biggest heroes have all been sports people; David Hemery, Brendan Foster, Steve Ovett, Alan Minter, Paula Radcliffe, Chris Froome, Bradley Wiggins, Teofilio Stevenson, Jimmy Connors, Henry Cooper, Miguel Indurain, Abebe Bikila, Kip Keino and many, many more including of course, Muhammed Ali.  As a kid, some of earliest memories are of sporting occasions and sporting achievements and Ali was as much a part of my childhood as my school teachers.

I was born in 1960, the year 18 year old Cassius Clay won Gold at the Rome Olympics.  By the time I was 5 or 6 I was fully aware of Cassius Clay, his outlandish talent and the audacity of his victory over Sonny Liston in 1964.  But even then I was aware that this was a man whose talents had already transcended the sporting arena.  As a 7 year old I remember being spellbound with anticipation at the upcoming Mexico Olympics during the summer of 1968.  My father had given me a book on the history of the Olympic Games and I read enraptured about the heroes of bygone days; Fanny Blankers-Koen, Emile Zatopek, Jonny Weissmuller, Lord Burghley, Bob Hayes, Paavo Nurmi, Dorando Pietri among many more, including Jesse Owens and Cassius Clay.

And it whilst reading this book that I first became aware that sports can sometimes become intertwined with politics.  It was the story of Jesse Owens at the Berlin Games of 1936 that brought this fact to light for me.  Maybe I didn't grasp all the political intricacies of Jesse Owens achievements, but I do recall becoming aware, perhaps for the first time, that there was political mileage to be had out of the colour of ones skin as well as the depth of one's talents and achievements.

In that book (which sadly fell apart due to overuse) I recall a picture of a young Cassius along with a brief description of the man's victory in Rome.  Up until that point I had considered that the Olympics was the pinnacle of world sport (which indeed it was, still is for many) and so I began to understand that in some sporting arenas there was something more, something higher than the Olympics; my introduction to the difference between amateur and professional sport.

Again, as a kid I didn't quite understand the significance when Clay changed his name to Muhammed Ali.  Civil rights, Malcolm X, Elijah Muhammad and slave names were a long way from my understanding, but looking back the fact that I was even aware of the names, the concepts and the philosophy behind his name change were probably landmarks in my social understanding and education.  The same could also be said of Ali's refusal to be inducted into the draft in 1967.

The Vietnam War was impossible to escape during the late 60's, early 70's.  The news, when I was allowed to see it, was awash with images of War that I didn't understand, of the mass protests in the US and the controversy it all wrought.  And into this powderkeg stepped Ali, a conscientious objector; a fighter who didn't want to fight!  I'm sure his decision then had more than a lasting influence on my young thinking.  Here was a man who was plainly not a coward, and was saying that he didn't want to kill anyone who'd done him no personal harm.  'It was wrong,' he had said.  The message rung a bell in my head that resonates still.

On the Left Ali-Frazier 1; on right with legendary sports writer Howard Cosell (left) and basketball star
Wilt Chamberlain (right)

Much later he told reporters, "I never thought of myself as great when I refused to go into the army.  All I did was stand up for what I believed."  Strong words that affected my thinking and without knowing it at the time, probably influenced my unconscious decision to become a combative pacifist; combative in sport, in life, but not in person, just like Ali.

When, years later, he returned to the ring, I remember watching his fights live on TV.  Often they were in the early hours, and my parents would wake me up to watch him trounce fighter after fighter, all in (not so) vivid black and white.  In those days he was by far the biggest star in the world, the most recognisable face, the most famous name and all his fights were screened live.  Of course it's the big fights that stand out; the three Frazier fights including the Thriller in Manila and the biggest one of them all, the Rumble in the Jungle against the fearsome George Foreman.  But sandwiched in between there were other fights (not all of which he won) that linger in my memory still; the Ken Norton fights, Joe Bugner, Trevor Berbick, Duane Bobick, Ernie Shavers, Jerry Quarry, and then later fights against Larry Holmes and (lesser?) champions such as Leon Spinks, Tony Tubbs & Tony Tucker.  

But Ali was much more than a fighter, he was the world's first global sports star and his personality was every bit as big as his best punch.  The interviews on British TV with Michael Parkinson are legendary as were his famed predictions, often put to verse, before his fights!  Everything about Ali was larger than life and he spawned many books, many stories (some true, some probably not) and probably more news print pages than any sports star ever.  The definitive biography of Ali is thought to be that of Thomas Hauser and it is indeed a thoroughly entertaining read.  And if that is the definitive book, then without doubt the definitive film is Taylor Hackford's Oscar winning documentary 'When we were Kings,' about the background to the greatest fight of all time, the Rumble in the Jungle.  But for another perspective, one that shows a different, much darker side of Ali's personality try Ghosts of Manila by Mark Kram.

For me Ali is an icon and his passing leaves a hole in my life.  He's been as ever present as any family member and I've lived his pleasures and agonies as much as any fan can.  In the latter years of his life I have actively avoided stories about his decline, preferring to remember him as he was; larger than life, full of wit and charm, an inspiration on so many levels to so many people.

You will be sadly missed.  RIP Muhammad Ali

Sources mentioned:
Ghost of Manila: The fateful Blood feud between Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier, by Mark Kram
Muhammad Ali: His Life and Times, by Thomas Hauser
When we were Kings, documentary by Taylor Hackford

Super Sunday! What a great day's sport!

Wow!  I'm an old bugger now and can only reminisce about my own sporting prowess, such as it was, so these days I'm a fully fledged and totally committed armchair sports fan and yesterday was truly a day and a half!  The World T20 Final, Leicester edging ever closer to the Premiership, Lewis Hamilton blowing yet another pole position, Peter Sagan doing a wheelie across the line in the RVV Tour of Flanders, Lizzie Armistead winning the women's race.......wow and double wow!  I can tell you my ass was numb by the end of the day, but it was worth every little tingle!

Starting off with football, I'd been to the local bar on the Saturday evening for El Clasico (Barca - Real) which we all know was won by Real 2-1 with Ronaldo scoring the winner, but to be honest it wasn't a clasico this time.   The end result was great for Zidane's new look Madrid and, of course, finally ended Barca's amazing 39 match unbeaten run (a club record  - no surprise) on a day that was dedicated to one of the all time greats, the late Johaan Cruyff who sadly passed away last week.  But sitting in a Valencia bar, after they'd just lost, again, against Las Palmas probably had something to do with the rather muted atmosphere for the match.  Well, that, and the fact that Madrid won (if you're not a Madridista in Spain then you're an anti-Madridista) all contributed to a rather lack-lustre match for me.

In the PL wins for Man City, Chelsea and Arsenal would normally have pissed me off no end, but this year not so much, simply because they're all so far behind a scintillating Leicester side (who I think have the backing of most of the UK now) and so just don't stand a chance of winning the league, which is a huge bonus!!  Come on the Foxes!!  You can do it!!

But for real drama yesterday, one needed to look no further than the World T20 Final in Kolkata where poor old Ben Stokes got walloped all over the ground by a pumped up Carlos Braithwaite for an amazing climax to what has been an amazing tournament.  And I must complement BBC radio for their excellent coverage on radio 5L which brought the atmosphere into my living room like never before.

And then onto Bahrain for the second Grand Prix of the season where once again Nico Rosberg dominated the whole weekend, his only blip being the loss of pole to Lewis Hamilton, but on a track made for overtaking the end result was hardly in doubt, and made all the more probable within 5 seconds of the start when Hamilton's second poor start in a row put paid to his chances before they'd reached turn 1, lap 1.  Too much partying Lewis!  Time to get your head out the bottle and back in the game I think!

And finally onto cycling where the awesomely talented Peter Sagan raced clear of the peleton in the final kilometres to win (I think) his first Ronde Van Vlaanderen in the Tour of Flanders and to continue what has already been a great season for the current World Road Race Champion.  The women's race too was won by Britain's World Champ Lizzie Armistead who seems to be having an even better start to the season than Sagan.  With all the big Tours yet to come this years cycling is shaping up to be yet another corker and I, for one, cannot wait for it all to kick off.

Sagunto: City of Ages. Pt.1. When Hannibal attacks.....

Sagunto - City of Ages

Part 1 - When Hannibal attacks….

The modern city of Sagunto holds a unique place in the historical and cultural heritage not just of Valenciana, but of Spain itself and, in a wider context, of the Mediterranean as a whole.  It sits on the Mediterranean coast some 30km north of Valencia and has historical origins going back over 2500 years to before the Roman occupation began in the area c.219 BC.  

The most compelling reason explaining the initial settlement here, as early as the 5th century BC, is the strong strategic position that the slopes and ridges of (what is now called) Castle Hill provided and where today the extensive remains of Castle Murviedro, the centrepoint of ancient life in the area, can still be explored.  With the Espadán mountains to the north, the Calderona mountains to the west, the fertile plain (the Horta Nord) of Valencia to the south and the ocean to the east, the first walled settlement, unfortunately named Arse, was in a strategically strong defensive position that allowed it to dominate the locality.  This fact is backed up by local archaeological evidence where from over 20 contemporary Iberian sites, Arse-Sagunto was clearly the largest.  Furthermore, with a flourishing port established at Grau Vell, the early inhabitants were able to exploit existing trade routes around the Mediterranean coast, particularly with the Phoenicians (from North Africa) and Hellenics (the Greeks) spreading their influence far beyond the Iberian peninsula.

The castle battlements line the top of the mountain looking much like a sleeping crocodile from afar.

Today the remains of the castle can be seen from every approach road into Sagunto as they tower over the city like a benevolent protector.  They stretch for approximately 800m atop the last ridge of the Calderona mountains with the castle walls running in an east-west direction.  However, any description of the castle, with it’s vast and varied history telling of the many alterations, repairs and restructuring undertaken in turn by the Romans, Muslims and Christians cannot ever encompass the true story of this amazing fortress.  

Following the signs for the ‘historic centre’ you wind your way through the modern houses and pisos to the old town with it’s distinctly Medieval flavour and ancient cobbled streets that lead you inevitably upwards towards Castle Murviedro.  On the way you pass by the excellent and aesthetically pleasing Museum of Archaeology for Arse-Saguntum and Castle Murviedro sited in La Casa del Mestre Peña (Master Peña’s House) and housing artefacts and collections from over 400 years of archaeological excavations.  

As you continue up the hill, passing by numerous quaint café’s, restaurants and souvenir shops the castle begins to dominate the vista more and more.  

When the castle itself first comes into unobstructed view, sprawling across the rocky promontory high above, the immediate feeling it conjures is one of heroic bygone days, of mythical heroes steeped in romance and mystery, of courageous, embattled defenders withstanding the onslaught of relentless, fearsome invaders as they throw themselves at the walls in the vain hope of gaining a foothold, whatever the cost, on the impressive walls or a first step onto the towering bastions, to etch their name forever into folklore, their story told around campfires for generations afterwards.  

It is not hard to stand at the base of the walls and be filled with a sense of awe for the courage and resolve of the men and women, defenders and attackers both, who sacrificed everything for the glory, advancement and future of their people and families.  It is a fearsome castle to behold, making one feel small, almost insignificant, besides the seemingly impregnable walls and all the blood that has been spilled here over the centuries.  

The site of the original Iberian settlement took the rather unfortunate name (for English speakers at least) of Arse, which it kept until adopting the Romanised name of Saguntum probably sometime in the early 2nd century BC.  Arse, built by the Celt-Iberian tribe, the Edetani, is thought to have covered about 8-10 hectares and was protected by a double defensive enclosure consisting of an outer wall (usually the biggest structure) and an inner perimeter wall and perhaps provided shelter and probably housing several thousand people.  Today the only part of the Iberian settlement that remains is a small section of the inner wall which can be seen at Tres Pouels (Three Little Wells), just outside the existing castle walls at the western end.  This wall was constructed of cyclopean limestone boulders, probably quarried locally, which were basically large, roughly worked polygonal blocks which would have had their exterior faces hammer-dressed in situ by masons and then assembled without mortar in an amazing feat of engineering when you consider the difficulty of transporting rocks of such a size to the location (each rock must weigh several tons), and the staggering precision and longevity of the construction itself.

As fearsome as the ramparts are today the exact scale of the structure facing Hannibal and his army in 219BC is unknown but they are thought to have been substantial.  The siege itself lasted 8 months, with Hannibal’s army destroying the castle defences bit by bit until finally, the end came.  

However, this wasn’t a mindless foray by an overeager young Commander hoping to merely stoke up the enmity with the Romans and maybe make a name for himself along the way.  Hannibal was a man with a plan and Sagunto was just the first step on what was to be a very long road.  For several years before Hannibal had been sending envoys across the Pyrenees into Gaul, and further still across the Alps into Cisalpine Gaul, to survey putative routes for his future Italian campaign and to sound out possible anti-Roman feelings among the native peoples en route.  So by the time Hannibal laid siege to Saguntum the plans for his monumental expedition were already well formed in his head.  Revenge would be sweet!

The lessons of the loss of the First Punic War were ingrained well into Hannibal by his father, Hamilcar, and so Hannibal was well aware that his people’s main weakness, when compared with Rome, was their lack of a native army.  The Carthaginians were a nation of traders and their armies had always been mercenaries, so that when, following the death of his father in battle and brother-in-law, Hasdrubal (assassinated), and at the age of 24, Hannibal gained command of the Carthaginian forces in Iberia, he purposefully set out to build a new type of army.  Using his (doubtless) immense personality and force of will Hannibal firstly consolidated the military and economic gains of his predecessors, then construed to pull those ‘conquered’ Iberian tribes south of the Ebro river under his banner making them allies and, in so doing, procuring the best parts of their armies for himself and to further his own precocious ambitions.

He then trained this army in almost constant warfare for nearly 3 years against any remaining Iberian peoples, engendering the loyalty of his multi-cultural band to his banner, so that by the time they arrived at Sagunto they were a well-oiled military machine.

Having been watching the Carthaginian progress from afar the Romans were more than a little disconcerted at what they saw.  With Hasdrubal having built upon Hamilcar’s initial successes the Romans now sought to stifle the progress of the Carthaginians in Iberia which, in the long-term, they themselves coveted.  Yet with insufficient military resources available to mount any sort of campaign in Iberia, the Romans thought to tie Hasdrubal to a treaty which limited the extent of his (and Carthage’s) ambitions to land (and hence, tribes) south of the Iberus and furthermore, it compelled both sides to ‘avoid’ annoying each other’s allies in the region.

Sagunto, which lay far south of the Iberus, (so in theory within Hasdrubal’s agreed territory) was a protectorate of Rome and, as the wealthiest city on the Iberian Mediterranean coast, was considered an important ally.  Hannibal would have been well aware of this and of the potential consequences of violating the treaty.  But his hatred for Rome and all things Roman was awe-consuming.

Having sworn an oath of enmity against the Romans at the age of 9 (which he honoured till his death in c.181BC) in the wake of the economic and social hardships suffered by the Carthaginian people and imposed by the Romans after the First Punic War, Hannibal had pre-meditatively set out to provoke his hated enemy.  And as we know, he more than succeeded.  

The Saguntines had pleaded with their Roman protectors to send help, but the Romans were preoccupied elsewhere with the Gauls and Ilyricans and had no manpower to spare and their pleas only received a mute response, such that when Hannibal finally offered terms the Saguntines knew there would be no Roman salvation for the city.

However, Hannibal’s terms were harsh, but after 8 months fighting and many lives lost he was in no mood to be generous.  He had insisted that the city be evacuated, the population to leave unarmed and with only two garments apiece.  When they refused these terms, returning to their homes to begin destroying what valuables they had left, Hannibal, upon entering the city, put every adult to death; a sorry end for what had been a stoic and brave resistance.

Having plundered the city, Hannibal returned to New Carthage, modern day Cartegeña, to regather his resources and recuperate before beginning his epic journey in May 218BC.  The Romans voiced their disapproval by sending emissaries to Carthage to demand Hannibal be turned over to them for justice.  When the Carthaginian Council refused, War was declared and the Second Punic War had begun.

Masked avenger Donald Trump rides to the rescue with sidekick Sarah Palin to kick ISIS ass!

Well howdy boys!  I’m back on the Donny wagon and Boy! don’t it feel good, because I’m a big fan of Donald Donny ‘don’t you just lurve my fly-away hair’ Trump!  And what’s more it seems I’m not alone!

I’m dumb-founded that our Donny is still the Republican front runner and now he’s got the ex-Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, whistling Dixie ‘long side him and don’t they just look pretty as a picture together?  Both smiling sweetly.  Both pro-gun.  Both pro-2nd Amendment.  Both gonna be pissed off when Clinton wins!  I hope….

And as much as I’d like Hilary Clinton to not only, of course win the Democratic nomination, but to then follow it up by trouncing Trump in the election proper, I've got a sneaking feeling it ain't gonna be that easy.  American politics is strange animal and making a prediction so far in advance is dodgy at best.  So I won’t be doing that!  Instead I’m going to look at potentially rather an odd parallel between this on-going, fledgling Presidential campaign and that of 2000 between Al Gore And George Jr.

Now, as we all know, Al Gore was defeated by ‘Dubya’ and, as you may recall, the world was then led into 8 glorious years of gung-ho, Republican ‘yeh-hah politics and foreign policy the price of which, both economically and militarily, the world is still paying.  And no, I’m not forgetting that 9/11 brought on the War on terror, but that is an argument/discussion for another day, so for now it’s shelved; just run with me here……

The 2000 campaign came In the wake of the Columbine massacre in April 1999, with Gore subsequently losing one of the closest and most controversial Presidential races in decades, some say as a direct consequence of his intent to push gun control measures and in so doing galvanising into action the most powerful and influential lobby in Washington; the NRA.  

Who can forget Charlton Heston, then President of the NRA, at their July 2000 Convention, as he made his chilling and highly creepy ‘my cold dead hands’ speech, growling ‘The NRA are back!’ and in so doing putting an end to Gore’s contentions.  

If we’d listened more closely at the time we might have heard Dubya’s War machine starting up.  

Now, more than a decade later we have another Democrat, Obama, once again pushing gun control measures after a 2015 in the US that saw on average, more than one mass shooting a day.  The mind boggles!  Truly!

Obama is plainly an emotional man, as witnessed by his tears for the dead children of Newtown, and consequently this is an issue he feels strongly about.  He’s a family man and I understand that perfectly.  Outside of the US most of us understand his feelings perfectly and recoil in horror together with Obama every time another mass shooting occurs.  Most non-Americans just don’t understand this obsession with Americans and guns, and somehow freedom always seems to get jammed in there somewhere, along with the 2nd Amendment and ‘the right bear arms,’ and we non-Americans just cannot see the how freedom, guns and dead children can go together now matter how you mix them up.  Ultimately, we empathise with Obama’s plight and sympathise with those who’ve suffered and see the only way to make the equation anything like balanced is to remove guns from it, or at least make them harder to get.  It’s just common-sense.  

Afetr all, the right to hold a gun doesn’t make any one man more free than another who chooses not to hold one.  It just makes them more dangerous.  

What have all these gun-toting red-necks got to be scared of anyway?  An even playing field perhaps?  But the facts remain that the vast majority of US gun-related deaths occur in black neighbourhoods, not in the white.  If the guns are taken out of the hands of the streets gangs, the mentally ill, and the criminal element then surely that is good thing.  Right?  No-one has ever said that any good, mentally sound, coherent and honest person may not own a gun.  In fact, if I’d want anyone to have a gun, it would be that person!  And when you wash away all the jargon I think that’s basically what Obama would like things to be like.  And for me that all sounds quite reasonable.

So can Obama use any Executive power he may have with which to push through any changes?

I don’t think so.  The Republican dominated Congress and the NRA are already galvanised and according to the Washington Post this may be the beginning of problems for Hilary Clinton similar to those experienced by Gore in 2000.  

And after all is said and done, what was America’s response to Obama’s proposal to use his Executive powers to curb the gun laws and to 20 dead children?  

The biggest ever retail sales day on guns!  The day after the Newtown killings!  

Once again, the mind boggles!

And now we have Sarah Palin endorsing our Donny because, and I quote, we want ‘a  Commander-in-Chief who will let our warriors do their job and go kick ISIS ass.  To secure our borders and secure our jobs,’  

Here's our Sarah....looking remarkably like Adam
Richman!  Strange that!  Sorry Adam!

Well, I think she was pitching for the Secretary of State’s position in Donny’s putative government by the way she was calling Iran ‘the enemy’ and promising to kick ISIS ass.  Presumably as SecState this would be easily accomplished by riding rough-shod over any international borders, trampling areas of political sensitivity and shitting on Middle-Eastern feelings and territory.  

That’s right folks!  Let’s make America great again!

Let’s endorse a foreign policy that will engender hatred for all things American.  I shudder think of the possibility of a President Donny sitting down over canapés with Vladimir Putin trying to sort the Syrian problem out.  

Now there’s a couple of really understanding fellas, you’d have to say!  I can see it now…...‘No, you go first Vlad, please!’  ‘Oh no, I couldn’t Donny.  You must go first.  Is Russian tradition.’

I don’t think so!  I think it’s Nukes at dawn and fuck everybody else!  That’s what I think.