Many national championships take place this week but often a country’s best rider is not taking part. Tadej Pogačar won’t race in Slovenia, Jonas Vingegaard won’t race in Denmark, nor Paul Seixas in France, Mathieu van der Poel in the Netherlands, Remco Evenepoel in Belgium and so on. This is causing a headache for national federations.
Riders skipping the nationals isn’t a new thing. Alberto Contador did it regularly. Chris Froome road the GB champs in 2010 before he was famous, and never again. But it does feel more pronounced. When Paul Seixas unveiled his plans to ride the Tour de France last April, this explicitly included skipping the nationals.
Outwardly the national championships are a day, or rather several days with time trials and age categories, to award a title but they’re also an event promoted by national federations and one of the rare moments where the public gets to see the federation in action. It’s a shop window and sometimes a money spinner if they can sell the TV rights and bank hosting fees. But this is diminished if the star power isn’t there.
The course can play a role, Vingegaard won’t find terrain to suit in the Danish championships but then Mads Pedersen isn’t riding either. Many riders don’t live in their home country either. The explanation for the absence is that several riders with an eye on the Tour de France tend to skip the nationals because it gets in the way of their plans. Riders must leave altitude camps, the race itself is often gruelling meaning they have to rest after when they’d rather finish a couple of dedicated training sessions this weekend and early next week. There’s always the crash risk too. In short because the best riders are going to the Tour de France they’re by extension sitting out the nationals.
The championships can still count, a rider who is on the long list for the Tour de France and wins their road race title this weekend might get the nod because of this. But this holds for riders well outside the superstar bracket who would draw audiences to the champs.
Some federations are thinking about a date change. But what to do? One idea is to hold the championships around the time of the world championships, so riders could race nationals one week and the worlds the next, or vice versa. But not easy, other parts of the calendar might have to be moved to fit this, eg no Vuelta or Lombardia overlap. Plus come the worlds plenty of riders have effectively ended their season already and so a September slot is no guarantee of participation. Pick any slot on the calender and it clashes with other races and objectives. A post-Tour slot? Sure but how many tired riders would prefer to take a break.
Another option is compulsion. In Belgium pro cyclists are obliged to take part. Only several high profile riders are not, like Remco Evenepoel and Tim Wellens. They risk being suspended by the Belgian federation for nine days… which means being ineligible for the Tour de France start. But a doctor’s note can absolve them. Only if they’re in peak form ahead of the Tour de France, what does the doctor do? Is it ethical to fake a problem, or to exaggerate a niggle as sufficient to exclude them? It’s happened before and it’ll happen again and risks making the federation look powerless.
For Red Bull there’s an added challenge because they lied about Evenepoel taking part in the Tour of Flanders, denying he would race it only to reveal in the build-up that he would take part, including releasing videos of him riding the route filmed during the Christmas holidays to show it was always part of the plan. Their media stunt grabbed attention but comes with a price and so whatever excuse they say about him now, nobody will believe them. This is not a huge deal, but does count.
Different teams have different priorities. Some love them as a source of UCI points. Some sponsors crave a national champion, others are indifferent or even slightly averse. Many companies today have brand manuals that run to many pages detailing the corporate typeface, the exact design of their logo, the precise colour tones and so on in part predicted on a unique international corporate identity… so merging this with a national flag can give marketing departments sponsoring cycling teams a cold sweat.
Conclusion
The Tour de France dominates the calendar and now it is even casting a shadow over the national championships. It feels more pronounced and routine now to skip the championships this week. There’s no obvious remedy, riders are free to pick events to suit. A date change probably means a clash with other objectives. And as Belgian shows compulsion just doesn’t work.
Napoleon is reported to have said “a soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of coloured ribbon” and the same holds for a national jersey. For those on the startline it’s a special race with a year-long reward.
Re: the Remco situation. Aside from the logistics being a pain, is a DNF an option? Just do the roll-out and pull up after the flag drops. Ticks the box and removes the risk.
Some of the risk, he still has to travel, risk someone coughing on him etc. Then come the newspaper headlines of him quitting, not taking part etc
Mads Pedersen, I read somewhere, is doing the Danish NC ITT and road race this year.
Otherwise, the Tour does over shadow the NC races because of their proximity on the calender. Shame really for the national federations.
You are absolutely right. Mads is indeed riding the Danish nationals. But even though he has company from quite a few fellow countrymen fra Lidl Trek, it is not a given he will win. The race is just as often won by riders not so prolific as Mads.
My impression is that there are a lot of riders who like to win their national championship once, and then don’t have much interest in winning it again. Of the riders mentioned by Inrng: Pedersen, Wellens, Pogačar, Van der Poel and Evenepoel have already won it while Vingegaard, Contador and Froome are/were not able to win it whatever the course.
Contador could have won it, he did win the time trial. But he had other priorities and preparation.
Yes, Contador might have won on the right course. But he didn’t really do much in one-day classics during his career.
‘preparation’
Another thing that might only affect a small number of riders eg European champs winners/Worlds winners. Pogacar is currently both so no-one wearing the euro champs jersey this year?
If there were separate winners, at least opportunity to wear the jersey for the full year (both held towards end of season), however nationals / world champs/euro champs don’t align, so no chance to show off both jerseys if a rider good enough to win multiple titles
The Italian Nats this year have become the terrain where the conflict between Fed and Lega (“League”) exploded, although they established immediately a short truce to be able to hold them. The latter, including representation of pro teams and big organisers, is an institution to which the federation handed over most of the issues related to managing some aspects, mostly economic ones, of the “pro” part of cycling, e.g. TV rights of some events (including Nats) etc. Only, it soon became the proxy through which RCS, as the biggest organiser by far, tried to leave the federation out of most decisions on the pro level of the sport, supported by teams. The federation tried to block such process, only to RCS to go and find a powerful ally in politics through a deputy of Berlusconi’s party, who started to find funds for the League… but not the Federation (which has to take care of grassroots and non-professional parts of the sport, including juvenile and, for now, women). Quite a mess.
Indeed, a mess. Seeing RCS linking up with the current government is risky as RCS will be around a lot longer than they will.
Nibali granted himself some special photos winning a couple of Nats in a row, the first just before the Tdf he finally won.
My wife, who has The Eye, took an excellent photo of him climbing a Yorkshire gradient in his Italian champion’s jersey. Not that we knew he’d end the race in yellow.
Don’t doctors expose themselves to sanction by their licensing bodies for writing what are very public and obviously fake or deceptive notes? Or is that just something that doesn’t rise to a level worthy of notice?
Given the past involvement of physicians in doping, etc. I wonder a bit that doctor would be willing even to write a note to keep Remco home from school for the day because of a tummy bug.
I think it is rather difficult to sanction them when there is no obvious harm to the patient, and the seriousness of any illness is a matter of opinion. Of course, the doctor will not outright lie (normally), so the notes are not fake.
I guess a motivated athlete can contrive to feel quite sick for a day.
That’s the thing, there is scope for conspiracy. Especially as for the other 364 days of the year the doctor’s role is largely about helping a rider to race on, within sensible limits, ie not forcing them but trying to enable them to perform. Wounds? Clean them, stitch them etc. Saddle sore? Treat it, etc.
there’s certainly a risk but when it comes to it a doctor mostly has to rely on what the patient says – if the patient says “i have these symptoms” then it would be more risky for a doctor to say “no you don’t, you’re fine, go race”
Affini, who was on Visma’s TdF roster, crashed out of the Italian TT championships today and was taken to hospital. A perfect illustration of the problem. Both the rider and his team will have regrets.
Nothing broken but a “deep cut to the groin”. It may be possible to recover for the Tour but that kind of wound is not what anyone wants before a grand tour.
Re the lead pic – is the third rider (orange helmet) also in a NC jersey?
No, think it’s Vauquelin. A side story is how the Netcompany-Ineos kit varies so much as they have different shorts. Maybe a reason for their riders to win this Sunday 😉
Thank you!
Some things come to mind.
A one day race would likely be good final prep for the tdf. As long as you don’t travel to far or have a crash. Its the sort of thing many riders do during the season. Do a race to get form for the next.
I can’t see how forcing riders to do the nationals is morally or legally right. Especially as the athletes are someone else’s employees.
The week before the race that actually defines the entire years sponsorship and reason many of the teams exists is probably bad timing.
Having a win basically means obscuring the sponsors logo’s so many sponsors would probably prefer the riders don’t win.
> I can’t see how forcing riders to do the nationals is morally or legally right. Especially as the athletes are someone else’s employees.
In practice the federations don’t push too hard, because they know that a legal challenge would see the rules struck down as an illegal restraint of trade.
Belgium can get away with a bit more than other federations, thanks to their structure where the federation employs all the riders and the teams pay the federation. Riders put up with it (instead of defecting to Luxembourg or Monaco) because the the disadvantage of having a large cut taken off the top of their salary is offset by the benefit of being able to easily break contracts.
Australia’s approach of not making national championships mandatory, but including them in the national team selection criteria, is a bit more reasonable than the cartel-like behaviour of some of the European federations.
First time I hear about belgian federation employing the riders? This is for the belgian riders on a belgian team only?
This did indeed sound odd. So odd, in fact, that I chose to accept it as the truth, however improbable 🙂
And it sounded odd also because one would expect the Dutch-speaking riders to be employed by the Flemish Wielerbond and the French-speaking riders by the Wallonian Fédération…
The Wielerbond is more an organisation for tourists, commuters etc. The CyV and FCWB are the regional variants instead that belong to the KBWB/RVLB or Belgian Cycling using the neutral English label.
Riders can have a licence but are not employed via the federation although it has set out a model contract in the past but this is done by the UCI now. Plus it’s impractical, eg Tim Wellens lives in Monaco, has a licence there and rides for team that is legally Swiss.
I foolishly only read an English-language Wikipedia article (“Cycle racing in Belgium”) which claimed that
“Since 2002, the Royal Belgian Cycling League is composed of the Wielerbond Vlaanderen (WBV), which governs the cycle racing in Flanders and of the Fédération Cycliste Wallonie-Bruxelles (FCWB), which governs the cycle racing in Wallonia and Brussels.”
If I had bother to look at *another* English-language article (“Royal Belgian Cycling League”), I could indeed have read that
“The Royal Belgian Cycling League or KBWB/RLVB (in Dutch: Koninklijke Belgische Wielrijdersbond, in French: Royale Ligue vélocipédique belge) is the national governing body of cycle racing in Belgium.”
reDaveRides – when you say can’t force I’m with you.
I’m a firm believer that you can naturally nudge riders toward participation in events like the Nationals if the structure around them is conducive toward it.
Exactly the point.
It is not in the interest of the federation to push too hard trying to enforce their rule, because any attempt to hand down the theoretical maximum punishment of a 9 day suspension would be struck down by an emergency hearing of the Court of Arbitration for Sport within 24 hours.
It is not in the riders’ interests to be too belligerent about challenging the rule when they can go through the motions of submitting an acceptable excuse. In return for playing along with it, they get the advantage of the Belgian employment contract laws if they ever want to break a contract and change teams – see Remco, WVA, Uijtdebroeks etc.
Of course there is a way that actual compliance could be increased – allow the obligation to be met by doing either the national road race or the national ITT.
Thanks for another interesting post on a problem I wasn’t really aware of. Hard to see a solution really. I guess to try and see a positive side, it’s an opportunity for lower profile riders that they might otherwise have missed. Wearing the National colours is no small thing.
Something not mentioned so far, but it can be difficult for riders to get a teamcar etc at national championships. Modern teams are very international, and it can be difficult for them to send a team car to support each of their riders when they are appearing at a large number of different events.
Combine this problem and current heat wave in Europe, which won’t be the last and the worst, and I think it is about time the UCI should organize a big conference with all stakeholders to rethink the entire pro cycling calendar. But of course, status quo bias will win until disaster strikes, like riders or audience dying from heat stroke.
Calendar reform will kill many of the races and destroy the sport.
Perhaps those riders wishing to avoid compulsory national championships could use the heat to their advantage by claiming to have got mild heat stroke when training & therefore get the desired doctor’s exemption letter!
Good luck when you’re staying at 1,800-2,000m altitude 😉
> staying at 1,800-2,000m altitude
Just get the doc to prescribe that as a preventative treatment.
It’s a bigger topic but the sport won’t change by itself, it has to follow audiences and others, so as long as school and factory holidays are in July then it’s likely the Tour is. It is hot across much of Europe but racing cyclists are among the least to suffer compared to construction workers, the elderly etc. What the UCI has done in the meantime is its Extreme Heat Protocol.
Hey Martijn – I wouldn’t bring up calendar reform here if I were you!!
I passionately agree overall and wholeheartedly agree on this specific issue of national races being part of the wreckage from a calendar unfit for purpose – but many fellow diehard cycling fans disagree with equal passion and are laser sharp in these comments sections to rubbish any potential changes as ill-thought through and likely sport-breaking illusions, despite the sport itself having made regular changes to the schedule (and general rules) over the years… and in my humble opinion so obviously in dire need of reform!
BUT I do say this being highly aware that any change does and would need to take into account any and all opinions of our sports many varied fans/stakeholders, and despite agreeing with you reform is necessary, I have also learned a lot from the input of naysayers here and their fears over change are often well founded and worth listening to even if you still disagree by the end – as I do.
Although if you just want to stoke the fires of general rage like some of the trolling we’ve had in recent days, mentioning F1 is usually the quickest way, as that really triggers the flames of hell!
*small note: I would not include John in this, despite us clearly disagreeing on this issue seeing his comment above, I’ve enjoyed many of his recent comments and would happily hear any of his thoughts, as well as those who are more vociferous in their disagreement.
From memory I believe John’s previously mentioned the need for state/regional councils input on any potential changes because it’s they own the most important part of our sport: the roads. A very good point. Plus the perils of not prioritising grassroots and historic cycling hotspots and plonking racing in places that lack the necessary excitement for them, ie Guangxi. Again a good point.
And… it’s extremely true from a more cynical standpoint that some have mooted changes before and failed miserably, so why even try? Plus we are nothing more than lowly armchair fans so why waste the breath on a sport we cannot influence!
Despite all this I’m with you! BUT we are in the distinct minority here so really it’s better to just leave it and enjoy what will hopefully be a brilliant Tour.
*(Vive la révolution! And congrats to all this weeks new National Champions)
Thanks for being generous about my comments. I think we should all be aware that it isn’t easy to make changes, and they often do not have the consequences people hoped for. In some cases, they cause enormous harm.
For example, moving the Vuelta to the late Aug-Sep slot has been very good for the sport. But moving the Zuri Metzgete/Championship of Zurich to the autumn slot completely killed the race. And this is a race which once called itself “the sixth monument”. Riders didn’t want to ride the race in its new slot, and nor did the public want to watch it on its new date. And this is generally true: races take many years to build their audience, and the audience interest does not easily carry over to a new date. This is something we need to be aware of.
This is a tempest in a teacup.
It’s not the biggest issue in the sport and not presented as this either. But it’s an issue for this weekend.
There are well over 225 Belgian cyclists competing at WT ,pro and conti level. Can the Belgian federation cope if they all turn up at the national championship as requested?
Any more would be pushing it but such big numbers seem a long way off, it’s often smaller.
The Tour of Flanders, Paris-Roubaix and Milan-San Remo have all had as many as 250 riders starting the race before. So I think it is possible to have such large numbers, even if I agree with you that it would not be easy.
Just as a follow-up, the idea of moving the nationals to a slot near the worlds has gone public with the French federation president saying today it’s been explored, and the move could be coordinated across Europe. But easier said than done to find a spare weekend and with no clashes elsewhere. So not next year or the year after but possible in five years’ time.
Then comes the problem of a long period of no racing before the Tour de France, or perhaps other races can be moved into this slot and riders not doing the Tour can do it?
Thank you for posting this.
Have long thought it makes sense especially if timing could be aligned with Southern hemisphere races being able to slot in for a single unified weekend to make the end of season/beginning of the next. Interesting that it’s getting some airtime now – I wouldn’t have known if you’d not posted here so appreciate the update.