Polarizing Champions – Wiggins and Vino

Wiggins followed by Vinokourov during Stage 3 of the
2010 Tour de France. Photo used with permission
from Graham Waston and velonews.com 

Road cycling at the Olympics is sadly over. It would make me very happy if there was a stage race the second week but everyone knows that is never going to happen. Still, we have our two Olympic champions and both of them are polarizing. Oddly enough, they are polarizing in completely opposite ways. Let me explain.

In Time Trial Champion Bradley Wiggins, we have a champion who is everything we could ever want off the bike. No doping (he threw his Cofidis jersey away and vowed never to ride for the team again after they were thrown out of the 2007 Tour de France for a doping scandal involving another team member) that anyone knows of. In fact, Wiggins is one of the harshest critics of doping in the sport of cycling. He trains and trains hard, talks to media candidly (if somewhat abrasively at times such at during the Tour de France when he used a particularly offensive obscenity starting with a c) and generally conducts himself in a sportsmanlike manner.

Still, there are criticisms. And most of those criticisms are for his style on the bike. Critics accused him and his Sky teammates of killing the Tour de France this year (it wasn't the most entertaining race in the world, but Sky did what it had to do to win the Tour and the route wasn't especially kind to potential challengers from other teams, especially once it became evident the biggest challenger to Wiggins was his own teammate). They also accused him of being boring on the bike (which is true). Wiggins is a time trial specialist and diesel climber. He's never going to explosively attack in the mountains like Alberto Contador, Andy Schleck and even Vincenzo Nibali (a poor-man's version of the other two to be sure but still an entertaining attacker). He's going to kill the time trials and hope to limit his losses in the mountains. Given that, of course he is a boring rider. If you've ever watched an entire time trial, you know it can be the most boring thing on Earth. Someone whose goal is to win by time trial and strangle the race in the mountains to win is going to be boring. That was the case in the early 90s with Miguel Indurain and it was the case with Lance Armstrong too (though Armstrong attacked in the mountains a bit more).

On the other side of the coin, we have Road Race Champion Alexander Vinokourov. Vino is everything we could ever want on the bike. He attacks, relentlessly. His most famous quote to the press is “When I feel good, I attack. When I feel bad, I still attack.” For most of career, Vinokourov has won fans by that attacking style. In a lot of ways, he is the crazy mad-scientist wild card that can blow up a race at any time. On top of that crazy style, he gets results. He is the only non-sprinter in recent memory to win the Champs-Elysses stage of the Tour de France (he attacked and made the breakaway stick, somehow). He has won Liege-Bastogne-Liege. He has won mountain stages of the Tour de France. The guy has a list of results that most could only dream of.

Still, Vino is extremely unpopular. Why? He is everything wrong about the sport off the bike. He was thrown out of the 2007 Tour de France (the same one where Wiggins trashed his Cofidis jersey) for having a blood transfusion during the race allowing him to recover superhumanly and win both a long breakaway and an Individual Time Trial after crashing early in the race. Vino was famously unrepentant and tried every way possible to get around the doping suspension including retirement. It didn't work. Vino still is unrepentant about his doping. Going back further, Vino was a part of the notorious T-Mobile team led by Jan Ullrich. Of course that team was notorious because of the culture of doping that existed there, led by Ullrich himself who is still banned from competition despite having been retired since the Operation Puerto doping scandal erupted just before the beginning of the 2006 Tour de France. Vino himself, though not implicated in Puerto, was excluded from that Tour by the scandal as the Liberty Seguros team he was on lost so many riders that a legal team could not be fielded and the sponsors left the team in mid season. Even further, Vino has been accused (and admitted previously) of paying other riders off in breakaways to win races. All of this along with the farce that was the 2000 Olympic Road Race (T-Mobile teammates Ullrich, Vino and Andreas Kloden destroyed the entire field and then finished in that order because of orders given by the trade team, not the National Teams the riders were supposed to be riding for) gives Vino a horrible reputation off the bike, one that caused the British sector of cycling fans on twitter to boil over after he won the Road Race on Saturday.

Still, the races gave us two very different polarizing champions. For Vinokourov, there is likely no way to repair his reputation. His off bike transgressions are quite long and awful and he is retiring anyway. For Wiggins, he is boring on the bike. There is no doubting that. Still, continuing to be outspoken against doping and continuing to win races will give him more fans. There is no doubt there. While both are polarizing figures in different ways, Wiggins has the opportunity to exact some real change in cycling, mostly because the only way to effect real change is to win without doping and be outspoken about. Vinokourov, while presumably clean now, was never interested in that, just winning at all costs, like nearly everyone in the sport from the end of the Indurain era to right now, when cycling seems to be coming out of the doping abyss for the first time in a very long while.

Olympic Time Trial Review

LONDON - Road cycling is basically the Bradley Wiggins show now. Wiggins (Great Britain) followed up his recent Tour de France overall victory with a Gold Medal in the Individual Time Trial today. The win was no shock as Wiggins gained much of his huge Tour de France lead on the back of his time trial abilities (he was second in the prologue and won both long time trials).

In the time trial Wiggins beat World Champion Tony Martin (Germany) by 42 seconds after trailing at the first time check, but that was expected as Wiggins gets much better as time trials go on and Martin is still recovering from his injuries both in the early season and in his stage 1 crash at the Tour de France.

Further down the standings, Tour de France runner up (and Wiggins teammate) Chris Froome (Great Britain) took the bronze over Taylor Phinney (United States). For Phinney, the result was his second 4^th of the Olympics. While a disappointment for him to not medal, he is only 22 and will have many chances over the coming year in both the Olympics and World Championships.

As for defending champion Fabian Cancellara (Switzerland), he finished 7^th while obviously uncomfortable on his bike after his crash in the road race on Saturday. Still, he gave a good effort as he was 3^rd at the first time check and 4^th and the other two before fading at the end.

For Wiggins, the win caps one of the greatest seasons in road cycling history. Nobody had managed to win the week-long stage races of Paris-Nice, the Tour of Romandie and the Criterium du Dauphine in the same season. It got better after that with his Tour de France win (the crown jewel of the wins) and then he added the cherry on top with his time trial victory today.

In addition, Wiggins became the most decorated British Olympic athlete ever with his 7^th career Olympic medal (three gold). The previous medals all came on the track with a bronze in 2000, a gold, a silver and a bronze in 2004 and two golds in 2008.

Next up for Wiggins is a possible run at the World Time Trial Championship in September. He was second to Martin last year. Beyond that, it is likely that he will being prepping for next season as he is unlikely to race the Vuelta a Espana and there are no major targets other than the Time Trial Championship that suit his abilities until next year.

Sorry no pictures today, I was on time check duty on the course today.

Olympic Road Race Review - From London

Olympic Podium. Gold medal Vinokourov center,
 Silver Uran left and Bronze Kristoff right.

LONDON - Alexander Vinokourov (Kazakhstan) easily won a two-up sprint over Rigoberto Uran (Colombia) to take a shocking gold medal win in  his final career road race at 38 years old (he will finish career in the time trial on Wednesday). Alexander Kristoff (Norway) took the bronze, beating the rest of the remains of the breakaway that stayed away to the finish in a sprint.

The win by Vinokourov has already been met with mixed reaction. For much of his career, Vino (as many of his fans call him) has been popular for his attacking style and willingness to drop time in the interest of attacking and wins. At the same time, Vino was long suspected of doping, having ridden much of his career with the notorious T-Mobile team (Jan Ullrich, doper extraordinaire), and then he was busted for an illegal blood transfusion during the 2007 Tour de France. This has made him an extremely polarizing figure, especially as he returned to his attacking style after his suspension ended and won Liege-Bastogne-Liege and Stage 13 of the Tour de France, all while being unrepentant for his previous doping sins. At his LBL win, Vino was booed mercilessly by the fans as he was on the winner's podium and many have still never forgiven him. This sentiment continued today as much of the British cycling media went ballistic on twitter after the race with some outright accusing him of doping even now and hoping he would be DQ'ed (I would argue some of this is frustration that Great Britain was unable to do what was needed to Mark Cavendish to the finish line with the front group).

As for the overwhelmingly favored British, the question of course is 'What happened?' What happened is a confluence of events that should have been easy to see but nobody really realized was likely to happen until after the race. The first is the small team sizes. When the British team dominated the World Championship RR in Copenhagen last October, it did so by controlling the whole race and getting help from a couple of other sprint minded teams to deliver Cavendish to the line with the front group. That was never going to work here as teams are made up of only five riders instead of nine. That limit makes it much more difficult to control the race and limit attacks from happening. Also, there were no race radios in this race. The most striking example of this was the composition of the final breakaway. First of all, it was huge, numbering over 30. Second, somehow Fabian Cancellara and three of his Swiss teammates got into the group. That is a terrible mistake to make given Cancellara's talent (more on him later). The final part that really hurt Great Britain was the distance and length of time after the Tour de France. All but Ian Stannard rode the Tour de France. Combine that with the 250 km distance and the five man teams and there were some tired legs. Both Chris Froome and Bradley Wiggins tried and couldn't bring the final breakaway back before pulling off spent. With nobody else willing to work, Britain just burned their legs basically from the opening moments of the race.

Race at the startline. 10 AM London time.

Still, that the break got away tells nothing of how Vinokourov got the win. For that, he needs to thank Cancellara's suddenly suspect bike handling. Cancellara badly misjudged a turn with about 20 km to go and went should first into the barrier. Given the composition of the group at that point, Cancellara was the odds on favorite to win from that spot in the race and his crash reopened the door for everyone else. With the break still going towards the finish but seeming somewhat confused, Vinokourov and Uran launched an attack. Normally, this first attack from the group is doomed to total failure, but then nobody really chased. Vinokourov and Uran (both with few teammates in the race) just rode away from the field leading to the sprint and the shocking conclusion.

As for the sprinters, Andre Greipel (Germany) came in first among them in 27^th place followed by Tom Boonen (Belgium) and Cavendish.

For men's road cycling, next up in the time trial on Wednesday. After Cancellara's crash, Bradley Wiggins is now an overwhelming favorite in the race as Cancellara may not start and will certainly be diminished and world champion Tony Martin (Germany) is still recovering from his injuries suffered both in the Tour de France and on Monday while doing course recon. Given that, Wiggins biggest competition may come from Luis Leon Sanchez (Rabobank) who was third in the final Tour de France Time Trial and appears to be in impeccable form right now.

World Cup in Qatar? Should Have Been Australia

Last week, FIFA awarded the 2022 World Cup to Qatar. There are numerous problems here both in the awarding of the tournament to Qatar and the coverage it has received in the United States.

Problems with Qatar

The heat – For the uninitiated, the World Cup is played in June and July. Temperatures in Qatar, a desert nation in the Northern Hemisphere are really hot. Probably too hot to be playing soccer in. No matter, FIFA awarded the World Cup to Qatar anyway and the nation in its presentation promised air conditioned stadiums outdoors. How they are going to manage that I don't know. Some have suggested moving the World Cup to the Winter is a possibility but that isn't going to happen. There is no way the European clubs agree to that (particularly those in England who feel jilted they didn't get the chance to host the 2018 World Cup) and for once, the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland will side with the European clubs and leagues. There is no way FIFA can step in and just say you are postponing all of your games and redoing your schedule to fit our needs.

The human rights issues – The World Cup is the biggest spectator sporting event in the world. Based on Qatar's laws right now, there are likely to be problems with both homosexuals and women being in the country for work or fan reasons. This isn't going to go over well in the money zones of soccer (Western Europe, mostly).

Stadiums and economics – Qatar isn't a big nation. In fact, it has about the area of Connecticut and the population of Phoenix. It only has any money because of the rich supply of oil it happens to sit on. Somehow, the nation has to fit 10 stadiums in that area. It just doesn't seem to work and the stadium idea seem rather fantastical. A floating island stadium? Outdoor air conditioning? Really?

Problems with the coverage

Too much focus on the jilted Americans – Much of the media coverage about this has come from the United Staes, feeling jilted about being passed over for another major world sporting event (following the IOC passing over Chicago for the Olympics). The American media wants to host another major world sporting event and they aren't used to waiting long lengths of time between being the host. Since 1980, there have been two Winter Olympics, two Summer Olympics and a World Cup held in the United States. Add to that two Winter Olympics and the 1976 Summer Olympics in Canada and the 1986 World Cup in Mexico and you get a world sporting climate that is tired of heading to North America at the same time that the US holds its worst political reputation ever. The media, not being used to not having these events, wants it at home. In addition, while the American bid was strong, it wasn't the best. That honor would go to Australia, a nation that has never hosted the World Cup and has the money, infrastructure and intangible reasons (no major recent events and no issues with human rights or weather) on its side to nearly the same level that the United States has. Nobody here has even mentioned the Australian bid just painting this as corrupt FIFA (which is likely true even if not proven at this point) stealing our birthright to have every major event come here.

The fact of the matter is that the American media has it right in one sense. Qatar is a bad choice to host the World Cup motivated more by politics than the best bid and presentation or the finances. While the tournament might ultimately be successful, taking a risk with it twice in a row (and taking it to Russia in 2018 is certainly a risk though the Russians are much more deserving and likely capable of pulling off a successful World Cup than Qatar) is ridiculous. It should have gone either to the United States or to Australia.

When is the World Cup (or any other major event) coming back to the United States?

As for when the United States can expect a major event here again, who knows? The Summer Olympics aren't going to be here any time soon after the Chicago fiasco. What American city is actually going to try a bid for the games and there is doubt that the United States can win in any realistic political climate in the future. The Winter Olympics would have a decent chance except that those games have made their way to either the United States or neighboring Canada four times in the last nine times the games have been held. North American fatigue is likely even with the games avoiding North America for its next two installments.

The World Cup of course is subject to FIFA politicking and the United States doesn't seem to be any good at that. Considering that North America will have gone the longest time between hosting World Cup's when 2026 comes around, there is a possibility of the United States winning that as long as another North American country other than Mexico (who has hosted twice and would become the leader with three World Cups hosted if they won making it unlikely) is not in the bidding, the United States has a chance if it bids again. Of course, based on FIFA's decision making, it is possible China gets it and if they don't probably Western Europe knowing that 2018 was sent to Eastern Europe and 2030 would be headed to China.