Vuelta a Espana Stages 1-8 - View from behind the sofa

Regrettably I've only been able to keep up with the Vuelta so far thanks to the wonders of YouView. Get the sponsored posts rolling in, that will.

Anyway, I'm willing to bet you've seen more than me, so what makes me a big enough authority to tell you what I think of it rather than letting you form your own opinions? Largely that you're on my site. So let's get on the soapbox and see what's happening.

It was a predictably unsettled start to a Grand Tour, as the leader's red jersey bounced around like a rubbery simile until it settled on the shoulders of Darwin Atapuma on day 4, and was only removed from them today, as (with all due respect to the BMC man) the proper fight for it began.

Safety has been an unhappily frequent topic lately, and concerns over the organisers', er, organisation were raised again after Stage 5, when Steven Kruijswijk, a decent-looking outside bet after a strong Giro, was launched out of the Vuelta after crashing into a bollard the organisers hadn't bothered to either cover with padding, hi-vis warnings or just run barriers around altogether.

And from another angle, the pole & the pavement where Kruijswijk received first aid. pic.twitter.com/Ec7Te52fBk

— Daniel Friebe (@friebos) August 24, 2016

Absolutely terrifying. That sort of road furniture is dangerous even for cars (as evidenced by the lean suggesting it's taken a clout from a car at some point), but to have that angled at a cyclist is shameful. Race organisers Unipublic were quick to apologise for the accident, but more should have been done in the first place.

With a similar crash last year that shattered Peter Stetina's leg in the Tour of the Basque Country, it should have been clear what the risks were. You can argue that one isolated incident can be learned from, but for it to happen twice in the same country inside 18 months suggests pure ignorance of rider safety.

Fortunately (!) for Kruijswijk, he escaped with a broken collarbone, comparatively light compared to Stetina, but still more than enough to end his race. Another to have an abandon thrust upon his was Rein Taaramae in Stage 7, who was hit by the Cofidis team car after being dropped, an incident which the Cofidis DS accepted responsibility for. Taaramae was somehow largely unhurt apart from cuts and grazes, with the stomach bug that caused him to lose time the primary reason for his withdrawal, but it's another reminder that rider safety has to be prioritised.

Speaking of crashes, Alberto Contador has been on the Contafloor again. He crashed at the end of Stage 7, but unlike his spills in the Tour, it doesn't seem to have affected him, as he managed to bounce back today to gap Chris Froome. Only by 8 seconds, but it's still a promising sign for the Spaniard, who had been more Contapoor than Contador as of late, losing time after the TTT and again in Stage 3, amounting to a minute and a half in next to no time.

But the final word has to go to Nairo Quintana, who took the lead of the race on today's Stage 8 after... wait for it...

QUINTANA ACTUALLY ATTACKED!

lavuelta.com

All on his own! Solo and early in the race and everything we've been gagging for him to do for the last two years. Although it is entirely possible that this is just him leaving it really, really late from the Tour, it is nevertheless a clear marker that the Colombian is on form, and wants to shake the Chris Froome-shaped monkey off his back. He took over 30 seconds out of Froome and teammate Valverde on the climb of La Camperona, who remain his two closest rivals in the current GC standings, with Valverde second ahead of Froome in the third he's held for almost the entire race, having been 5th and 4th in the first two days. That potentially race winning consistency is evident, and if Froome feels fit enough to properly show his hand at some point in the next fortnight, we'll all know about it. And so will Quintana's red jersey.

Stage Winners
1. Team Sky (ITT)
2. Gianni Meersman (EQS)
3. Alexandre Geniez (FDJ)
4. Lilian Calmejane (DEN)
5. Gianni Meersman (EQS)
6. Simon Yates (OBE)
7. Jonas van Genechten (IAM)
8. Sergey Lagutin (KAT)

General Classification
1. Nairo Quintana (MOV) 29:55:54
2. Alejandro Valverde (MOV) + :19
3. Chris Froome (SKY) + :27
4. Esteban Chaves (OBE) + :57
5. Leopold Konig (SKY) + 1:16

Mountains Classification
1. Sergey Lagutin (KAT) 10
2. Alexandre Geniez (FDJ) 10
3. Luis Angel Mate (COF) 9

Points Classification
1. Gianni Meersman (EQS) 60
2. Alejandro Valverde (MOV) 50
3. Luis Leon Sanchez (AST) 39

2016 Vuelta a Espana Preview

The last Grand Tour of the 2016 season is almost upon us, and in true Vuelta style, it's looking hard to predict. So let's try.

lavuelta.com

On paper, this Vuelta could be the three-way fight between Chris Froome, Nairo Quintana and Alberto Contador that we didn't get in July, thanks to Contador's crash/illness, Froome's general brilliance and Quintana's... yeah. We'll get to that.

Right off the bat, I'll go on record as saying my pick for the victory is Alberto Contador. He's unbeaten in three appearances at the Vuelta, and should be relatively fresh after his disastrous Tour didn't even reach the first rest day. Plus, there's the added incentive of a certain eccentric Russian, whose team are set to compete in their last Grand Tour before folding. You have to believe Oleg will want to go out on a high, and has named a team with the sole aim of helping Contador achieve their mutual goal.

skysports.com

Speaking of teams arriving at a Grand Tour with one focused goal, Sky are here to win. Chris Froome is back after dominating the Tour and taking bronze in the Olympic time trial. The key question with Froome is whether he's in form, as his Olympic road race was very lacklustre compared to his immensely high standards from the Tour. He's also not successfully raced in two Grand Tours in a season since 2012, when he followed 2nd in the Tour with 4th in the Vuelta. His two previous attempts at the red jersey both ended in DNFs, so bizarrely he comes into this race with a significant point to prove.

The third of those is, of course, Nairo Quintana, who is in danger of becoming the nearly man despite having won a Grand Tour. That sole win came in the reasonably dreadful 2014 Giro, and the major asterisk over Quintana is that he's never beaten Chris Froome in a Grand Tour they've both finished. Ever. His Tour performance was the limpest podium finish I can remember, with him somehow managing not a single successful or even threatening attack.

Movistar will once again send Alejandro Valverde as the backup/joint leader/outright leader/see what happens, and they will need to seriously rethink their tactics if they're going to improve their recent record of podiums, but no victories. For the sake of the race, let's hope at least one of their riders can muster an attack.

eurosport.fr

In my wise, wise opinion, I don't see that being Valverde, at least not for an attack on GC, as he competes in his third Grand Tour of the season, and fifth in a row. He's dominated the points classification in the Vuelta in recent years, and it will be a superb achievement if, at 36, he still has the legs to win the green jersey again after such a packed year of competition.

Of the teams outside that "top 3", LottoNL-Jumbo's Steven Kruijswijk and Orica-BikeExchange's Esteban Chaves will be looking to make the podium after strong showings at the Giro, while Astana will look to have a much more harmonious race without the duelling Aru and Nibali. All the world's top sprinters are focused squarely on the world championships in Dubai, and mercifully have elected not to ride in Spain at all rather than make a token, half-length effort such as we saw at the Giro.

It's intriguing to see question marks over all of the favourites coming into a Grand Tour, especially after the two we've already had this year. After Vincenzo Nibali made a meal of a comparatively weak field in the Giro, and Froome decimated a theoretically strong one in France, what will these next three weeks bring us in Spain? I've laid out my thoughts, comment or tweet us with your own, and keep your eyes here and there for our reactions throughout the Vuelta.

Olympic Roundup - Golds for van Avermaet and van der Breggen, no medals for safety

The history books will say that the winners of the 2016 Olympic Road Races were Greg van Avermaet and Anna van der Breggen, but that's not even close to the whole story. Both races were marred, and decided, by crashes on a tight, technical descent in the closing stages.

The men's race on Saturday was dominated by a strong breakaway, including Michal Kwiatkowski and break specialist Jarlinson Pantano. The six breakers remained clear through the four laps of the first circuit of the Grumari and Grota Funda climbs, and holding down the 20km run back down the coast to the decisive final circuit, the Vista Chinesa, with maximum climbs of 24%.

The circuit served to shake up the leaders, with Damiano Caruso, Geraint Thomas and Greg van Avermaet bridging to the break, followed later by Sergio Henao, Vicenzo Nibali, Richie Porte, Adam Yates, Jakob Fuglsang and Rafal Majka.

Conspicuous by their absence in the lead group throughout were the Spaniards, including Alejandro Valverde, the pre-race favourite according to our TLG poll. He, along with Joaquim Rodriguez (in his final race before retirement) were too slow to react, eventually joining a third chase group, but never threatening the leaders, and Valverde accepted defeat 20km from home, while Rodriguez rallied to claim fifth in his swansong.

The Dutch had an even worse time. With a strong lineup of Tom Dumoulin, Steven Kruijswijk, Bauke Mollema, Wout Poels, things started badly with Dumoulin withdrawing after just a few km, and only got worse from there. Mollema suffered a puncture and mechanical on the tough cobbled sections in the first circuit, Poels crashed after losing time, and Kruijswijk never looked capable of staying with the peloton.

But for bad fortune, look no further than the leaders on the descent that would quickly become infamous. Going down it for the final time, roughly 20km from home and averaging around 10%, Nibali, Majka and Henao had gone clear, followed by an elite group of chasers. Nibali and Henao fell from the lead group, leaving Majka alone out front, while Thomas slid off when well placed in the chase group.

Two of those chasers eventually caught Majka in the closing stages, van Avermaet and Fuglsang having stayed clear of the carnage and bridged across. Majka had nothing left to contest the sprint on the Copacabana, leaving van Avermaet to outsprint Fuglsang to take the gold medal, while Majka's disappointment at defeat was compensated somewhat with bronze.

skysports.com

The next day's women's race was a quieter affair in the early going, but with a much more dramatic ending. A group of seven had gone clear into the final circuit (which the women covered just once, rather than the men's three laps), with the Dutch well represented, with Marianne Vos, Annemiek van Vleuten and Anna van der Breggen all showing at the front.

As with Chris Froome 24 hours earlier, Lizzie Armitstead missed the decisive attack, and was left to chase in futility, in conditions not suiting her. An adequate but not great climber, she was never able to stay with the stronger riders, while Froome was limited by a lack of one-day skills, preferring longer, less punchy climbs.

Into the descent from Vista Chinesa, van Vleuten had attacked along with USA's Mara Abbott, with a chase trio of van der Breggen, Elisa Longo Borghini and Emma Johansson a minute behind.

Disaster then struck for van Vleuten, getting the back end out on a right hander, somersaulting into the gutter in probably the scariest crash since Johnny Hoogerland's flip into barbed wire in the 2011 Tour de France.

Abbott was left out in front alone, and as with Majka yesterday, couldn't hold on, but hers was a more heartbreaking effort. She was caught just 200m from the line, and by a group of three, meaning she had to settle for a medal-less 4th. Anna van der Breggen jumped clear as they caught Abbott, and was never challenged, taking gold for the Netherlands.

Tom Jenkins

But all of the sport pales in comparison to the fairly evident safety issues faced by the riders on the course. The first circuit had a punishing cobbled section, which caused several dropped chains, and bounced a lot of riders' water bottles loose. Those bottles did seem to be the cause of a crash in the first lap for the men, as Turkey's Ahmet Orken went down after apparently hitting a dropped bidon.

The second circuit, particularly the run down from Vista Chinesa, was treacherous. A narrow, winding, steep descent, with a thick canopy of trees causing either rippling shadows or blocking the light altogether. On either side of the road was a straight drop of roughly a foot, with a small concrete wall on the other side, forming a ditch.

It was a recipe for disaster, and the organisers' disregard for safety was shown by their reaction to Richie Porte's crash on the second lap. He went into the catch fencing on the left hand hairpin at the Vista Chinesa itself, and the mangled, limp fencing was left unfixed the next day. Had another accident happened at the same point, the rider could have gone through the fencing and down the drop below.

Fortunately, that didn't happen, but it was by no means the end of the crashes. Leaders Vincenzo Nibali and Sergio Henao both went down on a right hander in the final stages of the men's race. The tv bikes were, to their credit, giving the riders plenty of space, and as a result weren't close enough to get a proper view of the crash, only catching the two as Nibali was rolling down the hill, his bike tangled with Henao's a few yards earlier.

BBC Sport

Geraint Thomas was the next to crash, sliding off a little further down, ending up in the ditch at the side of the road, but luckily unhurt, managing to remount and finish 11th.

Annemiek van Vleuten was, of course, not so lucky on the same corner the next day. While the riders all knew the risks after the carnage of the men's race, rain made the descent slippery, and the prospect of a gold medal led the riders to keep pushing. She ran wide on the right hander, the back end stepped out and sent her flying over the handlebars, landing back-first on the wall of the ditch, and scarily head-first in the ditch itself.

It was a nervous wait for news on her condition, with nothing coming through until after the race. Much was said about her being described as 'ok', but considering the initial fears of many were grave, even that was good news. She was taken to hospital quickly, where she was diagnosed with a concussion and three fractured vertebrae in her lower back. It could have been much, much worse.

I am now in the hospital with some injuries and fractures, but will be fine. Most of all super disappointed after best race of my career.

— Annemiek van Vleuten (@AvVleuten) August 8, 2016

Those injuries, coupled with fractures to Porte's shoulder, Henao's pelvis and Nibali's collarbone, add up to an unacceptable casualty list for two races. Whenever the course was decided, and what little safety measures that were added were put in place, more should have been done. A few metres of catch fencing, and foam padding on the ends of walls and boulders on the descent, were not enough.

I appreciate a desire to even out the style of the events, and with a sprint-focused event in 2012, the organisers wanted one for punchers and climbers this time round. But if a safe route couldn't be found, it should not have been used. Four top quality riders over two days with broken bones is too high a cost, and one that could, and should, have been avoided. Whether it was the UCI, the IOC, or someone else who decided and ratified the route, they should be held accountable for the injuries suffered.

I am feeling very Olympic today. How 'bout you, Lizzie?

Sorry, couldn't resist a Cool Runnings reference. In case you hadn't guessed, TLG is about to wade into the murky waters of the Lizzie Armitstead situation. Before I give my thoughts, let's get the facts out of the way.

UK Anti-Doping has a policy of a four year ban from competition for three missed anti-doping tests within the space of 12 months. Lizzie Armitstead missed three tests on August 20th 2015, October 5th 2015 and June 9th 2016. By UKAD's own rules, Armitstead was charged and provisionally suspended on June 11th.

Ten days later, the Court of Arbitration for Sport ruled that the first missed test was to be voided, as correct procedures were not followed. Armitstead stated that she was in her hotel room when the tester had visited. Her phone was on silent and the staff at the hotel refused to give the rider's room information out. Armitstead did not contest the second and third violations. These were due to an administrative error for the second, and not updating her whereabouts due to a family emergency for the third, (and final) violation.

This is where the facts stop, and the questions begin.

bbc.co.uk

One of the key questions is why was the first offence not appealed much sooner, if not immediately. You can perhaps understand not bothering to expunge one strike out of three, but with a second coming just over six weeks later, why take the risk of another mishap in the next ten and a bit months?

And speaking of not wanting to take any risks, knowing that she was on her last chance before a four year ban should have had Armitstead in a state of constant vigilance. I appreciate I don't know the ins and outs of exactly how it works, but as far as I can tell there's a system where you can keep your whereabouts updated at all times, in and out of competition, so that you're always reachable.

My lack of knowledge also extends to what this family emergency was, but after eight months of being a step away from a lengthy suspension, surely it should have been second nature by this point to whip her phone out and update her availability. Being that close to having your reputation shredded, whether justifiably or not, would surely reshuffle your priorities.

That last point, about whether there would be justification, is an interesting one. A failed test is theoretically very different from a missed one (especially since Armitstead passed a test just a day after one of her missed ones), but in terms of suspensions, it makes little or no difference historically.

In 2007, Michael Rasmussen was suspended for two years for missing a drug test (granted, he admitted years later to have doped throughout his career). That two year suspension was the same received by Floyd Landis, who failed a drug test a year earlier. Both were leading the Tour de France (or in Landis' case, had just won it) at the time of the tests.

Boels-Dolmans

I was wondering whether she'd been saved by the five stripes across her jersey, as the current World Champion, but those high profile suspensions (plus Alberto Contador's suspension and stripping of two Grand Tour titles in 2012, when he was arguably the biggest name in cycling at the time) suggest that the UCI, WADA and associated bodies are not above suspending big names. If anything, the sense that not even the big names are above the law serves to add to cycling's credibility, which is slowly being regained despite episodes such as this.

But if there isn't any 'one rule for one, one rule for another' at the top of cycling, why has Armitstead's suspension been lifted. Was the family emergency deemed serious enough that they took pity on her, and absolved her using any loophole they could find? Doubtful. Anti doping agencies and the CAS aren't known for their caring approach.

 The only reason can surely be that she is clean, and that the first test was indeed not attempted under proper circumstances. Perhaps the only favouritism here is that Armitstead's name value has seen this case thrust into the wider public view. Did you all know that Diego Rosa will take part in Rio under the same cloud? He missed two attempted tests in June and was cleared of two of his three strikes. It is true that these were inarguably down to error on the part of the testing body, but three missed tests still get tongues wagging.

We could sit here all day and listen to me (or smarter people) discuss this issue, so I'll summarise my thoughts as best I can. I don't believe, in heart or head, that Lizzie Armitstead dopes. Nor do I believe that there's any nefarious reason for her missed tests. What I honestly think is that she's either naive or just plain daft. The questions I raised earlier, about why the first strike wasn't challenged earlier and how she did not think to update her whereabouts constantly when at risk of that third strike, are the biggest that Lizzie Armitstead has to answer, and ignorance is likely to be the reason.

What does remain, however, are two of her strikes, so let's hope she is constantly in touch with testers up until at least October 5th (when the second of those three infamous strikes will be, er, stricken), and hopefully well beyond. Armitstead's reputation has taken a bashing this week, but in time, with no more ammunition, it should survive. But if she allows more questions to be raised for any reason, it may not.