# Vaughters plans for cycling to become more popular



## iamnotfilip (Jul 9, 2007)

... Apparently he thinks it can become the most popular sport in the world. I don't know if it can get the popularity that English Premirship football can, but I think a lot of the ideas would make cycling more accessible to the fan, which I support. He speaks to the BBC and takes the chance to have a dig at the UCI:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/cycling/9429572.stm

Vaughters' 10-point plan to reinvigorate cycling:
1. More races of the highest level outside of Europe.
2. Consistent, understandable formats for cycling fans.
3. Long-term guaranteed entry to the Tour de France for professional teams.
4. More focus on prevention of doping, in the first place, as opposed to catching cheats.
5. More team-time trials more often.
6. Technical innovation, such as cameras on bikes, inside cars, helmets, inside team buses to make the "craziness and danger of the peloton more real to the viewer".
7. Equipment innovation to see if the the smartest team wins sometimes, rather than the strongest.
8. Open radios to the public and listen to your favourite team and what they are doing.
9. GPS tracking of individual riders to make races fun to watch.
10. Have an understandable and consistent way of determining the best rider in the world and the best team in the world. That might mean riders have to ride Paris-Roubaix, and if they do not finish they would be docked points.


----------



## jhamlin38 (Oct 29, 2005)

i like his ideas. i'd love for him to be correct. but pro soccer will always take the cake.


----------



## zosocane (Aug 29, 2004)

Ideas 6 and 8 aren't novel, but have never really been implemented consistently. I remember watching the 2005 Zurich GP and the Swiss TV coverage had cameras mounted on the seat-stays of a few riders. It was really incredible to watch.


----------



## weltyed (Feb 6, 2004)

i bet his sponsors like seeing his call for technology.

lots of this seem slanted toward his team, to be honest.


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

Mini video cameras on 10-15 riders in the Peloton would be awesome. A helmet cam would really add to the feel of the race. Do it Nascar style and broadcast this online.. 

Hell.. if Cycling.tv would beef up it's broadcasts and include this kind of footage it would be a huge seller I'm sure.


----------



## Sherpa23 (Nov 5, 2001)

Regarding cameras:

More and more often, people have been asking me what it's like to ride a professional Six Day or World Cup madison. They would see the tv coverage and ask how we know to move in and out of the pack, etc. I have always tried to explain to them but no one ever really understood how I explained it. Last year, in Italy, some of us put TINY cameras on the fronts of our bikes for one of the races but we didn't quite have the cameras right. The shots were too close and basically, you were just looking at someone's butt the whole time. Then, in Berlin, someone decided to do it right, one team does the cameras with one rider having one on the front and one rider having it on the back, and then they edited. Several people I know saw it and then sent me emails that they really understood it much better now and why can't all the coverage have views like this. I think that would make a huge difference in viewership. Anyways, if anyone wants to watch, here is the video from Berlin.


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

cool video!


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

Vaughter's ideas are cool and all, but he's forgetting that most pro sports are based on local hometown teams, so every city has a built-in fan base. 

I don't know how a pro cycling team, made up of riders from all over, can capture that kind of automatic fan base.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

I like most of the ideas. I don't know if it would propel cycling to the forefront but I think that it would help a lot. Especially having better coverage.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

Sherpa23 said:


> Regarding cameras:
> 
> More and more often, people have been asking me what it's like to ride a professional Six Day or World Cup madison. They would see the tv coverage and ask how we know to move in and out of the pack, etc. I have always tried to explain to them but no one ever really understood how I explained it. Last year, in Italy, some of us put TINY cameras on the fronts of our bikes for one of the races but we didn't quite have the cameras right. The shots were too close and basically, you were just looking at someone's butt the whole time. Then, in Berlin, someone decided to do it right, one team does the cameras with one rider having one on the front and one rider having it on the back, and then they edited. Several people I know saw it and then sent me emails that they really understood it much better now and why can't all the coverage have views like this. I think that would make a huge difference in viewership. Anyways, if anyone wants to watch, here is the video from Berlin.


Awesome video. I think that it is shots like this that will help make cycling and track racing more popular. I think that they are pretty cool to see the POV shots. 
I don't know if they have done it before but I remember seeing at the 2010 track worlds a Keirin cam on the derny. It was kind of boring since nothing was really happening but it was still a cool shot.


----------



## AJL (Jul 9, 2009)

iamnotfilip said:


> ...
> 
> Vaughters' 10-point plan to reinvigorate cycling:
> 5. More team-time trials more often.


I love TTTs (so long as they are at least 30km), but I think that allot of race fans don't get into it, never mind total newbies.

The other ideas have so decent merit. But one thing I don't see is the NASCAR crowd (in general) ever getting behind cycling.


----------



## parity (Feb 28, 2006)

Fast forward 10 years from now as the UCI will call for a ban of all camera mounted bikes.


----------



## orange_julius (Jan 24, 2003)

Sherpa23 said:


> Regarding cameras:
> 
> More and more often, people have been asking me what it's like to ride a professional Six Day or World Cup madison. They would see the tv coverage and ask how we know to move in and out of the pack, etc. I have always tried to explain to them but no one ever really understood how I explained it. Last year, in Italy, some of us put TINY cameras on the fronts of our bikes for one of the races but we didn't quite have the cameras right. The shots were too close and basically, you were just looking at someone's butt the whole time. Then, in Berlin, someone decided to do it right, one team does the cameras with one rider having one on the front and one rider having it on the back, and then they edited. Several people I know saw it and then sent me emails that they really understood it much better now and why can't all the coverage have views like this. I think that would make a huge difference in viewership. Anyways, if anyone wants to watch, here is the video from Berlin.


This is really an awesome video! 

While we are discussing how to make cycling more popular, I think it is good to specialize the target / potential audience a bit. It is hard to understand the tactics of cycling, and with all due respect to Phil and what's his name, they do a really poor job explaining things. That's why English-speaking US audience tend to like to watch only high mountain stages in the TdF, because then at least they are entertained by the seeming "simplicity" of the tactics and the ridiculousness of it all. 

Try to explain to non-racing cyclists even how and why riders do what they do in a one-day race, and it takes some effort but it is not impossible. And when they get it, they start conjecturing and thus they learn more. 

So in my opinion, while adding more viewing points is cool, I think that better explaining is also needed to *keep* the interest going.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

I totally agree with the cameras on bikes athet ability to hears the race radio. Not only does it give the view something of actual intrest to see at mots points during the race it involves them much much more in whats happening (Moto GP has done a great job of that).


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

No clue if it will generate much, but I admire Vaughters for thinking of it and trying it out.


----------



## GearDaddy (Apr 1, 2004)

So it looks like Vaughters watched some NASCAR, and then had the epiphany that cycling should do the same stuff. :idea: 

On a similar note, one of the local news outlets around here did a story about the Nature Valley Grand Prix happening here in town and tried to explain to the lay person that cycling races employ "NASCAR tricks like drafting". Doooh! :mad2: 

IMO, like any sport looking for a televised audience the key is first of all to get viewers to understand the players and personalities and the drama between them. That's what gets people interested, and then it follows later that the audience understands the nuts and bolts of how the sport actually works.

For example, take pro Tennis. Tennis matches by themselves are actually pretty boring stuff (John McEnroe himself has stated this). But, people tune in to see the flashy characters like Sharapova, the Williams sisters, et. al.

The problem for American audiences in particular is they just don't know who the heck these Schleck, Cancellara, Gilbert, and Cavendish guys even are. Sadly, they also don't know that we have a wonderful and promising crop of young American riders out there too. If you can get people to get curious about them and their battles, then you're onto something.


----------



## Sherpa23 (Nov 5, 2001)

GearDaddy said:


> IMO, like any sport looking for a televised audience the key is first of all to get viewers to understand the players and personalities and the drama between them. That's what gets people interested, and then it follows later that the audience understands the nuts and bolts of how the sport actually works.
> 
> For example, take pro Tennis. Tennis matches by themselves are actually pretty boring stuff (John McEnroe himself has stated this). But, people tune in to see the flashy characters like Sharapova, the Williams sisters, et. al.


Absolutely. BUT I think that if people could see from the riders view of the last 10km coming into a field sprint, when they have to fight for position, and move up properly, and launch a sprint from the right time, etc. it would shed light on some of this and you can get a better idea of the riders' personalities. Imagine watching NASCAR when Carl Edwards just bumps guys out of the way while someone else like Jimy Johnson takes a slower approach. Then, on top of that, add telemetry from power meters (I know, I know, no one wants another team seeing their power data mid race), and you have the makings for some drama.

The whole idea of making this a made for TV sport is showcasing the drama.

Waldo, the Derny mounted cam in a Keirin is basically not much different than having a camera man on the back of a motorbike as they do now. The big difference is that the motorbike has to stay far enough ahead of the races to not give someone an advantage.


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

*Vaughters is unrealistic*

He doesn't even mention the most important point. 
He's been inside the pro cycling bubble too long and has forgotten that there is a world outside it.
How do poor kids who have no money get high performance race bikes? Fancy clothes and helmets? Transportation to and support at races?
Kids in the slums of Rio or Jo'burg can get a ball and some rocks for goalposts and play soccer. They don't need fancy shoes, fancy shorts and helmets. They can play anywhere anytime. 
This is an expensive yuppie sport, definitely not accessible to everyone.


----------



## weltyed (Feb 6, 2004)

ummmmm, gambling? kierin and track events might be good. problem is, its a lot like short track speed skating and thats only mainstream-popular every four years.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Cinelli 82220 said:


> He doesn't even mention the most important point.
> He's been inside the pro cycling bubble too long and has forgotten that there is a world outside it.
> How do poor kids who have no money get high performance race bikes? Fancy clothes and helmets? Transportation to and support at races?
> Kids in the slums of Rio or Jo'burg can get a ball and some rocks for goalposts and play soccer. They don't need fancy shoes, fancy shorts and helmets. They can play anywhere anytime.
> This is an expensive yuppie sport, definitely not accessible to everyone.


In Europe the situation is different. 

Most local and regional governments support a team. Free bikes, kit, and travel to races. The barriers to entry are much lower.


----------



## JohnHenry (Aug 9, 2006)

i dont need bike mounted cameras, race radios to make cycling more interesting...
just like i dont need "miked up" football and baseball players.


----------



## moabbiker (Sep 11, 2002)

Yea, I'd say better camera angles are what's needed, especially for bunch sprints. The typical setup sucks. It's hard to show the speed involved in those distant shots. No reason bike cams shouldn't be used - the tech is there, the weight costs not a factor, and would provide huge marketing opportunities for camera sponsors.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

Cinelli 82220 said:


> He doesn't even mention the most important point.
> He's been inside the pro cycling bubble too long and has forgotten that there is a world outside it.
> How do poor kids who have no money get high performance race bikes? Fancy clothes and helmets? Transportation to and support at races?
> Kids in the slums of Rio or Jo'burg can get a ball and some rocks for goalposts and play soccer. They don't need fancy shoes, fancy shorts and helmets. They can play anywhere anytime.
> This is an expensive yuppie sport, definitely not accessible to everyone.



This isn't really talking about participation but more about fan base. Do you think that everyone that watches auto racing will be racing? 
Also, bicycle racing isn't about having a fantastic bike. That is what comes from the rich people in America that think that in order to succeed and go fast you need a 5k bike.


----------



## slim 83 (Jul 6, 2008)

waldo425 said:


> This isn't really talking about participation but more about fan base. Do you think that everyone that watches auto racing will be racing?
> Also, bicycle racing isn't about having a fantastic bike. That is what comes from the rich people in America that think that in order to succeed and go fast you need a 5k bike.


I am American, but have been living in Germany for the last 2 years and working in a bike shop here as well. It is certainly not the Americans leading the idea that more expensive=faster. There are so many people here blowing money on bikes that far exceed their performance level, but it is their money and they can spend it as they choose. To single out Americans is a bit ridiculous.


----------



## GearDaddy (Apr 1, 2004)

The TV coverage of cycling is actually pretty amazing. The work done by the moto-cameras and helicopters is some cool stuff really. Sure, there could be some enhancements and do-dads like on-bike cameras or more graphics that make it easier to pick out and follow individual riders, etc. But, overall I think we get a pretty good view of the action.

I do think that Vaughters is onto a few good ideas though, especially related to bolstering the team aspect of the sport. There is a bit of a problem with reliable branding of teams and consistency. There's a lot of turnover and disarray in how teams come and go and change. Having a structure that allows for more stability in teams would also allow fans to more easily attach to what's going on.

I like his "more TTTs" idea too, as it again bolsters the team organization. Plus it's a flashy spectacle. It seems the biggest resistor to the TTT is the teams themselves, as TTTs tend to expose big disparities between the teams, which in turn hurts the chances of teams that have a high profile star rider but a weak support crew. I think the big stage races could modify things to better accommodate for this though.


----------



## Kram (Jan 28, 2004)

I think most of (well, all of) these ideas are great. To be honest, some long road stages can be pretty boring to watch, even for cyclists. Adding cameras and GPS locations would certainly liven things up a bit.


----------



## iamnotfilip (Jul 9, 2007)

I like sherpa's idea about showing data from power meters. That, coupled with live GPS data, on-bike cameras, and a live feed from team-audio can be enough information to create drama during flat stages for even new comers. Imagine if you knew how much energy a person and a team spent during the race, stage or the last xx minutes, it's easy to see how it will make the end of a flat stage more interesting. Then throw in breakaways into the mix and it becomes a really exciting sport for the newcomer as it does not become hard to understand that someone has been burning for the last hour, while someone has been taking it easy, and you have potential for instant drama.

As far as teams being against this, I don't think they'd be against it as much as having viewers (and competitors) listen in to the radio. I'd be even surprised if the publicity of power meter values would surprise anyone in the teams much.

And for the seasoned cycling fan, all of this technology can create a brand new medium to watch the race. Imagine having an internet page where you can tune into any team's radio, on-bike cam or into anyone's power meter, do analysis of your own with the data. That would make it really exciting for anyone.


----------



## iamnotfilip (Jul 9, 2007)

double post removed.


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

GearDaddy said:


> ...people tune in to see the flashy characters like Sharapova, the Williams sisters, et. al.
> 
> The problem for American audiences in particular is they just don't know who the heck these Schleck, Cancellara, Gilbert, and Cavendish guys even are. Sadly, they also don't know that we have a wonderful and promising crop of young American riders out there too. If you can get people to get curious about them and their battles, then you're onto something.



This is the real answer - fans become fans because of individuals and personalities. this is why reality tv is so popular, American Idol etc. Lance Armstrong. Tiger Woods. Michael Jordan... these are the attractions, not the sport itself. 

What cycling needs, and I suspect Vaughters and the UCI both understand this, is more local character. Like the Japanese riders who are now in the protour. The African kids that Paul Sherwen is working with. Remember the Colombian teams in the Tour, years ago? They are still national heroes. Raul Alcala, from Mexico, still famous back home.


----------



## baker921 (Jul 20, 2007)

Maybe they could develope an idea from Formua 1 http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/22032011/23/ecclestone-pushes-sprinkler-idea.html
and chuck down some diesel on half a dozen random corners! That would spice up the racing.


----------



## black_box (Jun 7, 2008)

baker921 said:


> Maybe they could develope an idea from Formua 1 http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/22032011/23/ecclestone-pushes-sprinkler-idea.html
> and chuck down some diesel on half a dozen random corners! That would spice up the racing.


jesus. Of all the driving leagues, wouldnt F1 be the worst for random weather effects? 120MPH into a corner you thought was dry?


----------



## ghostryder (Dec 28, 2009)

Would love to know how fast they are going at all times.


----------



## ArkRider (Jul 27, 2007)

I think to really raise the sport's popularity in the states will require that people in the U.S. become better able to relate to it.

Many non-cyclists in the U.S. not only do not understand the dynamics of professional bicycle racing, but they can't relate to the athleticism of the racers. They have very little experience with bicycles, only relating it to that easy spinning around on the toys of their childhood.

They know they can't pitch a 100mph baseball or survive a hit from a 300lb lineman. But riding a bicycle? "Yeah, I remember when I was 10 my friends and I would ride up that big hill by the house. Sometimes the grandkids and I ride our bikes around the block." Of course you still have to deal with the attitude that the only reason an adult would ride a bicycle is either because they lost their license or are such losers that they can't afford a car (and I can't help but laugh when some bozo in a $2000 car yells at me to get a job and buy a car).


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

Unlike most sports where the objective of endeavors like this is to just make more money, JV actually seems interested in making the SPORT, not just its money gross, better.

Well done.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

To clarify it does not appear to be JV who is driving the bus on the split but Brunyeel and Riis.

Some interesting interviews on the topic first McQuaid (2 parts)

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7...eagues-Grand-Tours-and-the-Olympic-Games.aspx 


Bruyneel
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7...oesnt-rule-out-rumours-of-a-rival-league.aspx


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

Cinelli 82220 said:


> He doesn't even mention the most important point.
> He's been inside the pro cycling bubble too long and has forgotten that there is a world outside it.
> How do poor kids who have no money get high performance race bikes? Fancy clothes and helmets? Transportation to and support at races?
> Kids in the slums of Rio or Jo'burg can get a ball and some rocks for goalposts and play soccer. They don't need fancy shoes, fancy shorts and helmets. They can play anywhere anytime.
> This is an expensive yuppie sport, definitely not accessible to everyone.


Tell that to my friend podiuming almost every race he enters on a 21 lb. base model Raleigh with a set of mountain bike SPDs and a camelback.

This is an expensive sport only if you DECIDE YOURSELF to make it one. You dont need carbon-soled shoes and a pair of Assos bibs to go fast.


----------



## Sherpa23 (Nov 5, 2001)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> To clarify it does not appear to be JV who is driving the bus on the split but Brunyeel and Riis.
> 
> Some interesting interviews on the topic first McQuaid (2 parts)
> 
> ...



Well, none of this matters without a series/league/protour/etc. If the fighting continues and we have no real cohesion of rules, races, and assembly of a season, there is not much point of even talking about any of this of stuff. Maybe someone should ask Tony George how that whole IRL thing worked out.

But here is one thing that I do know: all you need for a race is two people who each think that they can beat the other. As long as you have that, there will be racing. All the other stuff (road closures, prizes, tv coverage) depends on the level of interest and tolerance of some immense complication. But if people want to race, there will be racing somehow.

I remember we had a popular race get shut down one year and none of the racers were happy about it. So what did we do? On the appointed day and time, everyone showed up with $5. We put all the money in someone's pocket and had a winner take all. We didn't need officials, governing bodies, cameras and all the other stuff. But no one saw the race, no one remembers the race, and I doubt any of us can remember everyone that was there. If you want that stuff, and the money that comes with it, someone has to sit down and figure it out. 

As far as I'm concerned, the UCI has done a terrible job with cycling, it's only charge. They've ruined track cycling at the Olympic level, and now they're doing the same thing with road racing. At some point, however, it still comes down to two people each wanting to whoop the other and that's the thing that riders still have the power to control.

EDIT: You know why this doesn't happen in MLB, NFL, etc? The players all have unions. Real ones. AIGCP isn't even close. They don't have all the riders and the UCI doesn't even take them the least bit seriously. When the riders have a union, then maybe some of this stuff might go away.


----------



## kbiker3111 (Nov 7, 2006)

Sherpa23 said:


> EDIT: You know why this doesn't happen in MLB, NFL, etc? The players all have unions. Real ones. AIGCP isn't even close. They don't have all the riders and the UCI doesn't even take them the least bit seriously. When the riders have a union, then maybe some of this stuff might go away.


Bingo!


----------



## JustTooBig (Aug 11, 2005)

there was a guy over in General last year who posted some race video he'd shot from his bike during a circuit race; he used post-production software to display his power, HR, speed and cadence in a "dashboard" format on screen, synched up with the video. Some uber-cool stuff, indeed. Using telemetry to get that data, along with on-bike video, to televise (relatively) live is not much tougher.


----------



## Sherpa23 (Nov 5, 2001)

JustTooBig said:


> there was a guy over in General last year who posted some race video he'd shot from his bike during a circuit race; he used post-production software to display his power, HR, speed and cadence in a "dashboard" format on screen, synched up with the video. Some uber-cool stuff, indeed. Using telemetry to get that data, along with on-bike video, to televise (relatively) live is not much tougher.


It's not hard or uncommon. The technology is all there. There is a very good coach, who shall remain nameless, who films his riders' track efforts and then superimposes a window in the corner with running SRM data. It makes for very effective post training/racing analysis but, if used right, would make for very good TV.

What needs to happen in the TV world is for someone to do for cycling what they did for golf; make a seemingly calm and innocuous game into a gripping all out battle.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

That would be interesting to watch. They seemed to try doing that in the '09 TdF, but it seemed like they were having problems getting accurate info. I didn't see if they did that during the '10 edition.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

slim 83 said:


> I am American, but have been living in Germany for the last 2 years and working in a bike shop here as well. It is certainly not the Americans leading the idea that more expensive=faster. There are so many people here blowing money on bikes that far exceed their performance level, but it is their money and they can spend it as they choose. To single out Americans is a bit ridiculous.


Sorry, I had just hoped that it was Americans and not rest of the world. Either way that mentality is pretty nasty IMO. Ive almost been shunned before. Been told to go with the slower guys --- five minutes later I was riding off the front of a hill on my own.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

Sherpa23 said:


> Absolutely. BUT I think that if people could see from the riders view of the last 10km coming into a field sprint, when they have to fight for position, and move up properly, and launch a sprint from the right time, etc. it would shed light on some of this and you can get a better idea of the riders' personalities. Imagine watching NASCAR when Carl Edwards just bumps guys out of the way while someone else like Jimy Johnson takes a slower approach. Then, on top of that, add telemetry from power meters (I know, I know, no one wants another team seeing their power data mid race), and you have the makings for some drama.
> 
> The whole idea of making this a made for TV sport is showcasing the drama.
> 
> Waldo, the Derny mounted cam in a Keirin is basically not much different than having a camera man on the back of a motorbike as they do now. The big difference is that the motorbike has to stay far enough ahead of the races to not give someone an advantage.


I can see how that would work pretty well after a few kinks are worked out. 

I would like to see a POV camera in a bunch sprint.


----------



## evs (Feb 18, 2004)

*Yes SuperDaves stuff is like that...*

not sure if this is exactly what you are talking about but I downloaded some of his stuff to use for winter training to pass the bordom. He did this overlay with this crit link....
http://myworldfromabicycle.blogspot.com/2011_02_01_archive.html
I like how he races very well with the 2 cameras on his bike. Great angles. He got some guy wiping out behind him on a corner from his rear camera. Not every racer has to have a camera but if some of them do it might make for some more interesting footage. Check out his other stuff to see the 2 different camera angles and how it works out. 
I think doing it in real time is were thinkgs get tricky. If it's a replay then it would be easy to do. Again with the Nascar comparison, but how do they do it so well in real time? 




JustTooBig said:


> there was a guy over in General last year who posted some race video he'd shot from his bike during a circuit race; he used post-production software to display his power, HR, speed and cadence in a "dashboard" format on screen, synched up with the video. Some uber-cool stuff, indeed. Using telemetry to get that data, along with on-bike video, to televise (relatively) live is not much tougher.


----------



## slim 83 (Jul 6, 2008)

waldo425 said:


> Sorry, I had just hoped that it was Americans and not rest of the world. Either way that mentality is pretty nasty IMO. Ive almost been shunned before. Been told to go with the slower guys --- five minutes later I was riding off the front of a hill on my own.


No problem man. I see a bunch of people on here make comments putting down Americans or putting the Europeans on a pedestal, but the truth is there is not much difference between the 2 and their rides/buying habits. The biggest difference I see is most people here do not care for Sram much and so many Americans love it. 

To give you and example, we had a guy come in and he wants the most expensive Orbea Orca we have ever sold. New Orca, full Super Record, SRM, and the works for parts. It is going to be over 10,000 euro. I personally don't think anyone could use a bike like that to its full potential, but it is his money and I won't argue.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

slim 83 said:


> No problem man. I see a bunch of people on here make comments putting down Americans or putting the Europeans on a pedestal, but the truth is there is not much difference between the 2 and their rides/buying habits. The biggest difference I see is most people here do not care for Sram much and so many Americans love it.
> 
> To give you and example, we had a guy come in and he wants the most expensive Orbea Orca we have ever sold. New Orca, full Super Record, SRM, and the works for parts. It is going to be over 10,000 euro. I personally don't think anyone could use a bike like that to its full potential, but it is his money and I won't argue.


I live in a very rich area and it becomes very tiring to hear about their high and mighty attitude. I know plenty of people who are tech geeks and have the latest and greatest just because they like it (if I had the cash I would do the same.) Every once in a while I run into a guy on a bike who likes to rub it into my face that they have Campy everything. 

Personally, I think that I or some of my friends (we all train and race hard) could come close to use a bike like that how it is intended. Unfortunately I will most probably not own a high end bike like that until I am sponsored. I ride on a used track bike and a disc wheel that cost 40 dollars.


----------



## jswilson64 (May 20, 2008)

How's cycling supposed to be more popular when it's hard enough to get people to understand why the guy who just won the sprint isn't winning the Tour de France?


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

jswilson64 said:


> How's cycling supposed to be more popular when it's hard enough to get people to understand why the guy who just won the sprint isn't winning the Tour de France?


Kinda the same way that the team that just scored a TD isn't winning the game, or the team that scored 4 runs in the 8th inning isn't winning the game, or the team that went on a 20 point run in the 3rd quarter hitting six 3 pointers isn't winning the game.

It's all a matter of getting people to watch, having some way for people to explain how stage races work, strategies work, how teams work together, the difference between a classics race, a stage race, a TT, a crit, etc.

People are not stupid (well, not all of them)...they just tend to narrow their focus on sports as they get older. If you can pull some of those people into cycling it's a start...then pull in a few more and continue to do that and you get support for TV contracts and sponsors. 

Then you get more people riding bicycles and racing on the local level since it's something they can actually do well into their 60's and 70's...how many people still play football after high school? A few still play basketball in leagues and softball becomes the sport of the couch potato as people age...nothing stopping cycling from getting there with the right people promoting it and the right types of TV coverage and things could pick up quickly...or die a fast death but we won't go there


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

jswilson64 said:


> How's cycling supposed to be more popular when it's hard enough to get people to understand why the guy who just won the sprint isn't winning the Tour de France?


You can't know unless you've been taught or shown how things work.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

slim 83 said:


> To give you and example, we had a guy come in and he wants the most expensive Orbea Orca we have ever sold. New Orca, full Super Record, SRM, and the works for parts. It is going to be over 10,000 euro. I personally don't think anyone could use a bike like that to its full potential, but it is his money and I won't argue.


LOL, it's good to see the consistency of hating THOSE guys.

Regardless, I'm hardly that good and I can see/feel the benefits from nicer stuff.


----------



## evs (Feb 18, 2004)

*The announcers need to tell the rules...*

of the race over every day so new audience members will learn. They very rarely go over the specifics of the jerseys, points, stage wins, team play, strategy ect. It's not complicated and would only take a few minutes each broadcast. Some of the stuff like strategy and other rules could be used as filler material during the show. Not only would it be informative but if one person learned of this, they might teach others. The Versus shows are all for american audiences I think, so it would be to their benifit to do so. :mad2:


----------



## Dynastar (Jun 8, 2007)

evs said:


> of the race over every day so new audience members will learn. They very rarely go over the specifics of the jerseys, points, stage wins, team play, strategy ect. It's not complicated and would only take a few minutes each broadcast. Some of the stuff like strategy and other rules could be used as filler material during the show. Not only would it be informative but if one person learns of this, they might teach others. The Versus shows are all for american audiences I think, so it would be to their benifit to do so. :mad2:


Funny you say this, because every time one of the announcers starts doing this everyone jumps all over these boards and starts talking how they are idiots. Kirsten Gum used to ask these easy questions and everyone started posting that she was an idiot and knew nothing about cycling. But that was her job, to ask those questions so that Phil & Paul could explain the basics to a new American audience.


----------



## evs (Feb 18, 2004)

*It's not a bad thing...acting like an idiot*

if you take it with a grain of salt. HAHA, some times its a good way to learn new things. Her intentions were good and she was not bad to look at.  I know the wars within the wars and how a stage race works, but alot of newbs to bike racing don't. They know there are teams but why and how is never really explained to them. Not even the drafting stuff. This needs to be stated over and over again in various ways so new people can learn. The knowledgeable ones just need to chill and let some newbs learn. They should show a nice lead out train to the audience and explain why and how and the dangers of doing this or that is wrong ect. and show how the speeds start ramping up as they get closer to the line but they never do. They could have a camera on the speedometer of a following motorcycle for example or put one right on a bike. If they don't know, how does a network expect to hook a new audience in and make it adrenaline packed. The producers need to make it more exciting. I liked the idea of the camera they had on the last day of the tdf on the last sprint. I think it was on a sliding rail. Innovative ideas like that is what's needed. Showing the heart rates going throught the roof with some loud bass as they sprint home , haha, lol or something dramatic like that on occassion might make it more interesting for the average american. 



Dynastar said:


> Funny you say this, because every time one of the announcers starts doing this everyone jumps all over these boards and starts talking how they are idiots. Kirsten Gum used to ask these easy questions and everyone started posting that she was an idiot and knew nothing about cycling. But that was her job, to ask those questions so that Phil & Paul could explain the basics to a new American audience.


----------



## sab. (Jan 17, 2011)

I like it. for point 1, i think having Battenkill and the Quizno's race (though "Pro Challenge" is a terrible name, call it The Quizno's Classic like the old race, or buy out the Tour of Colorado name) could help a lot to increase popularity in America if they're promoted right. 

3&4 would help with stability in the sport so we don't see rapid changes with teams folding like we do.

5 im not so sure about, but having more TTTs can't hurt

On 7, the UCI unwadding their panties over technichal innovations would really give the big manufacturers to pump money into pro teams for the promotion they'd get (sort of like F1, except vehicle performance would still be a secondary factor in cycling, while for many F1 fans its the primary draw-ie, i'm still a Ferrari fan even though now their top driver is Alonso, while Schumacher drives for Mercedes).

I really like 6,8, and 9- improving broadcast coverage would make fans watch races longer, and without a doubt draw in more casual fans, since it would make coverage a lot easier to understand for those who don't have an intricate knowledge of the sport. I think seeing an ESPN highlight with some of those features might make quite a few people stop on a bike race next time they're flipping channels

10 would also have a major impact with casual fans coming to cycling, but I doubt many purists would shoot for it, personally i think riders should be allowed to compete in whatever races the teams choose to put them in as long as the top teams compete in the top events- contador or the schlecks riding P-R would be silly. But I do think a better points system would help for casual fans if it was weighted less towards stage races. I personally hold the monuments at the same level as the GTs, and seeing GT winners get 6x as many points as monument winners doesn't seem quite right. It would help people understand that cycling is about a lot more than the TdF


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

parity said:


> Fast forward 10 years from now as the UCI will call for a ban of all camera mounted bikes.


Unless they're UCI licensed with a sticker!:thumbsup:


----------



## sab. (Jan 17, 2011)

Ventruck said:


> Unless they're UCI licensed with a sticker!:thumbsup:


which would cost a couple grand per camera model


----------



## nayr497 (Nov 8, 2008)

I like a lot of the ideas but I can't really say I'm all that concerned with cycling becoming more popular. I don't ride a bike or watch races because it is popular.

I'm an American and my favorite sports to watch and follow are cycling, ice hockey, and world soccer. Most American sports are too overdone for me, to artificial at this point.

Outside of wishing I could see all the races (I am able to watch most online for free & I don't own a t.v. anyway) I don't really wish cycling were more popular, at least in these terms here. Maybe his ideas would lead to more cyclists, dedicated bike lanes, driver awareness, which would all be great, but I doubt it. These would be the only reason I'd like to see cycling be more popular.


----------

