Analysis: Breeding one kind at the expense of another

Four out of six stages at the Tour Down Under ended in a bunch sprint finish. Likewise, four out six stages at the Tour of Qatar finished the same way.

And more than likely, at least four out of six stages at the Tour of Oman will also conclude with bunch sprints. After all, we’ve had three from three so far.

Is it any wonder why we’re seeing a proliferation of sprinters within the peloton? Cavendish, Greipel, Goss, Hushovd, Farrar, Kittel, Boonen, Sagan, Renshaw, Guardini, Galimzyanov, McEwen, Oss… and this is just the tip of the WorldTour iceberg.

More than ever, it seems the majority of races around the world are geared towards bunch sprints, or at least enticing riders to become sprinters rather than GC riders or opportunists.

While the 28-event WorldTour calendar provides a balanced mix of Grand Tours, Classics and semi-Classics with a bunch of hilly and not-so-hilly races, the bulk of races (or stages within those races) are skewed towards the sprinter – particularly outside mainland Europe.

Take the domestic front in the U.S. and Australia, for example: the National Road Calendar (NRC) and National Road Series (NRS) calendars, respectively, are chock-a-block full of criteriums. Why? Because they’re far easier and less expensive to stage; rolling road closures with mandatory police escorts and additional personnel required to ensure riders’ safety are, invariably, prohibitively expensive for the cash-poor race organizer.

It is not the case with Great Britain’s Premier Calendar, but being so close to Europe, many locally-based pros have the option to race abroad if they wish to do so. Obviously if you’re one of the enviable select few in any of these countries’ national teams, being part of their sports institute involves a block of racing in Europe from anywhere between two and eight months.

Becoming a rare breed indeed…

I can’t help but feel the circuit race/criterium-oriented grass roots programs and domestic calendars in the U.S. and Australia is breeding a certain type of rider at the expense of another. While the English-speaking presence in the professional peloton is ever-increasing, within that Anglophone subset, the GC rider is not.

If one looks back to the top 10 positions on the final leaderboard at last season’s three Grand Tours, you will find the names of just four Anglophones: Cadel Evans (1st Tour de France), Tom Danielson (8th TdF), Chris Froome (2nd Vuelta a España) and Bradley Wiggins (3rd Vuelta).

When Evans chooses to retire two or three years from now, is there anyone from Down Under ready to take his place?

A lot of talk has revolved around the likes of GreenEdge’s Cameron Meyer and Jack Bobridge, but it’s not like they’re in a rush to step up. Both intend to be part of Australia’s track team at the London Games, and with respect, both are yet to prove themselves in a race like Paris-Nice, Tour de Romandie, Criterium du Dauphiné or Tour de Suisse.

Since Lance Armstrong’s retirement, Danielson (Garmin-Barracuda), Christian Vande Velde (Garmin-Barracuda) and Levi Leipheimer (Omega Pharma-Quick Step) have been the best American performers as far as Grand Tours goes, but at 33, 35 and 38 years old, respectively, this trio only have a few silver bullets left in the chamber.

Realistically, you would have to say it would be a huge ask for any of them to win a Grand Tour before they retire, given they have Evans, the brothers Schleck, Ivan Basso, Alejandro Valverde and Alberto Contador (when he returns) for company – though it would be truly remarkable if any of them were to do so.

As for those in the pipeline, it seems America has around the same number of Grand Tour candidates as Australia, and at roughly the same stage of development.

Tejay van Garderen is perhaps the most exciting prospect Stateside, whose mentality reminds me a little of Andy Schleck: goofy, carefree, and perhaps a little unaware of his own talent – although the 23-year-old’s progression the past two years can only be described as auspicious, should he decide to focus on the three-week tours. As far as the latter is concerned though, Van Garderen is still some way off; 82nd overall at last year’s Tour de France equated to two-and-a-half hours behind eventual winner Evans.

Andrew Talanksy (Garmin-Barracuda) and Matthew Busche (RadioShack-Nissan-Trek) are two others waiting in the wings of their elder Statesmen. At 23 and 26 years of age, respectively, they enjoy the privilege of youth (particularly Talansky) and need not hurry their development.

Winning the young riders’ classification at last year’s Tour de Romandie certainly provided a fillip for Talansky, but like Australia’s Meyer and Bobridge, both still need to show more Grand Tour potential. Talansky and Busche rode last year’s Vuelta (their only Grand Tour in 2011) for RadioShack and finished 79th and 113th in the GC, 2.5 and 3.5 hours down, respectively, on overall winner Juanjo Cobo.

In light of potential accolades, prize-money and sporting immortality, it may seem odd that you would need to push an aspiring wannabe down the Grand Tour path, but as far as the U.S. and Australia is concerned, it’s becoming all the more necessary.

I’d be interested to hear from you about what can be done to stop the rot, so that we continue to discover more like Lance and Cadel.

FILED UNDER: Road