one4smoke

Any chance a USA cyclist can contend for a TDF GC win anytime soon? What are some possible prospects?

Iride01 

If they are there and they are not a domestique, then they are in contention to win. Unfortunately, there just are not enough teams with a US cyclist as the supported GC rider at the TDF or any other grand tour.

Doge

See my Brandon posts. Follow him.

FWIW the 2015 USA juniors were the best in the world (so they got the UCI Nations Cup award).
Some moved on to other things, which would be less likely to happen for Euro kids.

But in general, USA has no hope.

bogydave

Had the polkadot jersey for a couple days last year........

Pemetic2006

Last year there were only 3 Americans in the TDF. This year TJ (he didn't ride it last year) is doing it but it's in support of Porte. I'd assume as of now he (TJ) is America's best chance as a GC rider but even he isn't targeting any grand tours this year.

burnthesheep

I've recently read 2 of 3 Gaimon books while travelling for work.

One thing really stuck with me that I had a huge misconception about. I thought that the US also had a "pipeline" like Europe has with youth cycling.

Whoa was I wrong. They get them going out of the crib over in Europe. In the US, it's likely a kid who started riding in high school with a roadie dad and then rode in college.

In Europe you've got 12 year olds climbing HC climbs.

It's a similar answer to why the US can't win a World Cup in futbol.....it's not a "way of life" with the common man. The only thing keeping us competitive in either is the fact we are a huge country population wise, and have percentages of huge numbers of people working out to having the athletes.

Just IMHO.

bikecrate

Wasn't Andrew Talansky the last great U.S.A. hope after winning the 2014 Critérium du Dauphiné? He retired already this last year.

Doge

See the Brandon thread. Question answered.
/End Thread

one4smoke

Is Tejay and Phinney the only two in it this year??

Iride01 

The team rosters for the 2018 TDF aren't complete. Many teams have multiple riders that could ride the TDF. There is a strategy to pick who makes up your team for any particular event. Some of the early racing might determine who makes the unfilled slots for the TDF. In some cases a team doesn't want the other teams to know who will comprise their riders.

So until the first start.... it's an unknown or subject to change.

Doge

I think that is somewhere backwards. USAC takes really great kids and focuses on them. They tend to not focus on those with less talent at the time. Thing is, what the kid is at age 22 is more about work ethic than talent (IMO), and of course they need both. USAC eyes them at 13, then sticks with them while others develop and change is less than ideal. My kid was doing nationals since age 9. He was screwing off and not training, just being a kid, so we didn't take him to nationals age 12 and 13. No big deal we thought. But the other kids got seen, he didn't. He got serious and it took 2 years to get really noticed again. The kids getting the most cycling time were those that did the best earlier years. Later years, they were generally not the top, or were burned out - or both.

If USAC wants to get involved, I think it should be more round robin exposure. Give more kids smaller chances. I'd do it earlier maybe with families invited. In general USAC coaches want the parents away. I saw this both ways in soccer and the family oriented teams did better I thought than the ones that isolated kids.

Another MAJOR issue is many great American kids don't want to live in Europe esp in their teens.
Then there is that college thing getting in the way, which is a draw for many.

kingston 

This is a pretty big deal. For the high-level kids in most kids in most sports in the US, competing at the collegiate level is an achievable goal, so it keeps them interested when things get tough. Then when they're 18 or so, they have access to elite level coaching and a chance to see if they can reach the next level all while they are getting a free college degree. If it doesn't work out, they haven't wasted four or five years of their life with nothing to show for it. The cost of admission is too high for cycling when those same kids are probably athletic enough to be good at something else with a much lower opportunity cost.

Doge

If cycling were an NCAA sport - things would be different. But it is not.
My daughter was an NCAA soccer player and got recruited by then champs Notre Dame. She played one year (it was agreed), as here desired degree had conflicts, got no money, but got in.

My son, the cyclist, had to choose. At age 16 he said "I don't want to live in Europe" - after maybe a dozen UCI junior races in Europe, where he'd finish in the top 20%.
He agreed USA racing is not a career, and we shopped him rowing his junior year. He didn't like that and went back to cycling for the love of it. He got into the USAFA and other than he has to balance it all (welcome to life) he gets to ride in a beautiful place and race all over. He got to 7 USA National Championships last year. That makes me sad in a way and also proud of his level of maturity. There are a handful of other kids I could name, but won't for privacy, that are clear world class level - and have chosen other things to do. Some still dabble/carry USA pro licenses, or have quit altogether. But they are still all that level. I know 3 that decided to go all-in (no college, riding a pro team). It will be interesting to see how that pans out.

kingston 

Swimming is probably the best example with some parallels to cycling; a team sport with an international level where it's pretty easy to measure individual contribution.

USA Swimming dominates the world by skimming the top of the NCAA where some kids don't reach the international level until Junior or Senior year.

Doge

I am not privy to what "pro" swimmers, or track and field athletes make. Endorsements sure, but as a %, I think very few get that. Phelps is like saying Sagan.
Swimming (and track and field) are also different as the age athletes peak is much lower. At age 18 if you are a swimmer it seems to me everyone knows, or has an idea. Running/sprints - age 18-21 are pretty well established. At age 18 as a cyclist - nobody does. So the choice is much harder/bigger risk. Of the USA top juniors in 2015 from the group that won the UCI Worlds Nations Cup (USA juniors were the best in the world), one is all-in. Two are not racing, two are in college, and a couple others I don't follow. That is all from age 17-19.

kingston 

Pro swimmers are probably a lot like cyclists. A few make a lot of money and most don't make very much at all. There are also a few who are elite as teens, but most peak in their early 20's. One of my kids swims for UNC and has aspirations to swim on the national team in a few years. Plan B is a degree from UNC. If plan B were start college at 22, she wouldn't be swimming right now. I don't know anything about track and field athletes.

Doge

Seems we are not debating. Just that I am pretty sure USA teen cycling talent is on par with anywhere. It is that next step our kids bug out. I'm kinda OK with that.

Iride01 

Might part of the issue be that in the USA since cycling is only important to those of us that do it, that companies and advertisers don't see much use for cyclist as the rest of the USA doesn't speak cycling, like they do football, baseball, golf, basketball and such.

Football is a second language to most US citizens. A football player had the clout to make drinking light beer an accepted practice. He was able to endorse a product outside his sport with a message understood by virtually any group of people. But with few following the sport of cycling in the US, no one will understand a cyclist recommending any product outside the sport of cycling. And that means the sponsors audience will be a niche group.

There fore less money, less USA cyclist in TDF.

burnthesheep

I'm going to toss a turd in the punch bowl, or maybe a Snickers that just looks like one.........

How about the Lance effect on USA cycling and how Europe always seems to have it out for the US with cycling?

Let me explain. I feel like every time a euro dope scandal erupts, the ramifications never were and never will be as severe as for the US riders and teams.

It's like "oh, American was winning and is doping......let's ruin cycling for America". It's a european....mehhhh let's put his statue up there near where he died on that stage (Tom Simpson). I also love how the cause of death for him is often listed as a much more romantic "exhaustion" instead of the truthful "drug induced exhaustion".

Vegasclimber

Phinney, Howes and Craddock are all likely to be in the TdF this year, but I don't see any of them in GC contention. Craddock might be there eventually, but he has a ways to go yet.

As stated above, a lot of talent just isn't making the leap to the next stage these days, and there isn't any big money in the US really pushing to put together a few teams and get interest built up again. The NuclearLance fallout is likely to continue for some time.

Caretaker

It's not all about 'yellow', any of them could win a stage. You guys just need to lower your expectations.

one4smoke

"Lowering expectations" seems to be the trend these days.

A stage win is great, but the race win is what it's all about.

colombo357

TJ was the last American GC hopeful.

Iride01 

I agree..... you can win all stages but one and still not win the tours. The winner doesn't have to win any stages. That's what forces you to have to pick your stratagy carefully. To me it makes tours slightly more interesting when you can see the strategy behind what certain teams and riders are doing at any one moment.

Individual races are less on the strategy and more on the how good am I feeling today. Not saying there is no strategy, just not quite as much to consider for the one day race. So it's just a little tiny bit of added interest to me.

Iride01 

Probably if we want an USA riders as GC we need to get more USA based sponsors. Particularly as the primary team sponsor. I'm sure that country loyalties play a small part to sponsors. Will it make sense for them to want a USA rider as GC if their product is not getting it's primary revenue from the USA?

Rider stats aren't the only thing that matters.