CyclistHow to fix the Tour de France King of the Mountains classificationThe polka dot jersey is one of the most recognisable symbols of the Tour de France. This unique classification is hard to predict and offers a quirky dynamic within the Tours often nebulous dynamic. Yesterday, we discussed the rapid devolution of the Tour de France breakaway, and one of the factors we mentioned counting against the break these days is the dwindling chances for an outsider to win the King of the Mountains classification. The idea of attacking away on the regular for a polka dot jersey seems lost when you know the GC riders will win it anyway.Since 2020, only one non-GC contender, Giulio Ciccone, has finished the Tour in the polka dot jersey, the others having gone to the overall winner of the race in Tadej Pogaar(once) and Jonas Vinegeaard (twice). Before the 2020s, the King of the Mountains was more often decided by a breakaway chancer, with the yellow jersey having only won the classification nine times in Tours history before this point.In 2024, it looks as though one of the chief GC protagonists is going to win the mountains classification again. After 18 stages, Tadej Pogaar, Jonas Vingegaard and Remco Evenepoel fill the top three places in the KOM standings as well as the GC.Christian Prudhomme, I hope youre taking notes. Heres how to restore the King of the Mountains classification to its former glory.Keep categorisations consistent and closer in pointsA.S.O./Charly LopezToo often at the Tour de France, climbs are not compared equally in terms of their categorisation. Some climbs of an equal length and gradient receive wildly different peggings and therefore point offerings. For example, on Stage 10 of last years Tour, two climbs with similar stats, the Col de la Croix Saint-Robert and the Ctede la Chapelle-Marcousse, received different categorisations. And on Stage 12 of last years race, the categorisations werent regular throughout the stage; its a lucky dip as to whether climbs receive Category 3 or Category 2 status. In response, the Tour should use uniform criteria for categorisation based on length and gradient. For example, any climb less than two kilometres should be granted category 4 status. A hill between two and five kilometres should be billed as category 3, and a climb between five and ten kilometres should be in the category 2 bracket. Anything between 10 and 15km should warrant Category 1 stature. This leaves hors-catgorie, which is reserved to climbs in excess of 15km as long as the average gradient is over 5%.While were at it, the points on offer for different climb classifications should be narrowed. Category 3 climbs should warrant three points (one more than at present), Category 1 climbs should receive 15 points (an increase of five) and the rarer hors-catgorie climbs should remain on 25 points. Related Posts Is this the end of Tour de France breakaways? How much is the 2024 Tour de France prize money? Mens Tour de France 2024: Route, how to watch and all you need to know History of the Tour de France jerseys and how they got their colours More points for intermediate hills and bumpsA.S.O./Billy CeustersParticularly on hilly stages known in French as accidente smaller climbs through the stage are not honoured with a KOM classification. The bumps hidden in the profile should receive categorisation like any other.At the 2024 Tour de France, some climbs have managed to miss KOM footing, even if their gradients and length should really warrant one. Stage 18 to Barcelonnette missed out on two climbs worthy of at least Category 3 name at Les Costes and Le Lauzet-Ubaye. Similarly, a 7km-long climb on Stage 16 to Nmes went unnoticed by the race organisers.With a breakaway up the road, these smaller uncategorised climbs could be turned into KOM markers in order to spice up the competition. More points on offer during the middle part of the profile should make for a more exciting competition for riders hoping to gain a points haul before the high mountains.Double points for historic climbsA.S.O./Charly LopezIn 2022, Tour de France organisers cut the amount of points handed out at mountain top finishes. Previously, double points were on offer for summit finishes usually considered the toughest mountain finishes.Double points were a good incentive for riders searching out the jersey. However, the system of multiplying points at summit finishes ended up favouring GC riders who often contest to win these stages.Instead, add double points for select historic climbs. The likes of the Col du Galibier, Col du Tourmalet, Alpe dHuez and the highest point in the Tour (the Cime de la Bonette in the 2024 races case) should be awarded double points. In terms of breakaway hopes, these peaks frequently come midway through a stage so would favour an escapee group over the main favourites.The Giro dItalia employs this system for the Cima Coppi, which is allocated solely to the highest point in the race. This does a good job of ensuring a big breakaway fight for that prestigious prize and the hefty amount of KOM points that come with it. In the past decade, the Cima Coppi has been won by the breakaway on seven occasions, and three times by GC stakeholders.In order to add to the prestige of these climbs, a little sprinkle of bonus points could work wonders for the classification.Time-trial style mountain classificationA.S.O./Billy CeustersMore drastic in its principle, the KOM points could be decided by each riders time up a categorised climb, from base to summit. No matter where you are on the road, whether it be in a breakaway or the grupetto, each rider gets their own individual times. In return, the fastest ascents would receive the points on offer.Climbing isnt sprinting, after all, so why should points be awarded simply for first over the line?Riders will mostly ride up the climb at their normal pace, but for those wanting to fight for the classification, they are free to hammer up the climb as fast as possible. Even if a plucky climber is dropped under this alternative system, they can measure their effort and still score points.This reform does not tackle the looming presence of GC riders among the top places in the KOM standings, however. If the peloton decides to accelerate, then the points will likely favour the peloton. However, the equal footing each rider will have at every climb could make for an exciting and open contest, riders that start the climb at the back of the group of favourites could ride in the wheels and sprint to the front at the end to take a faster time. Riders could also drop off the back of the group to rest their legs for a climb, increasing the points of intrigue on the road.This system would add another complicated dimension to the KOM competition though and, lets be honest, the Tour is already complicated enough.But, shouldnt the best climber win the mountains classification?A.S.O./Billy CeustersThe other argument is that the prize is known as the King of the Mountains, not the Court Jester of the Mountains. With this view, the best climber should win the contest, not the luckiest and most entertaining breakaway climber.Perhaps the system was broken all along in favour of the breakaway instead of rewarding the best climbers in the race. Its hard to argue for example that Julian Alahilippe was the best climber at the 2018 race when he was 1h 28min behind Geraint Thomas in the GC.The days of paper-light climbers shedding four minutes in time-trials and hoping to still be successful are gone. GC riders are optimised to climb, stay high in the rankings and fight for stage wins throughout in this current era. You cant dispute that Pogaar and Vingegaard have been the best climbers over the past four Tours.Maybe this return to GC riders at the top of the KOM standings is a reflection of the climbing greats we currently witnessing at the Tour. We have returned to the times of Fausto Coppi and Eddy Merckx, who won both yellow and polka dots multiple times in the same Tour.The big polka dot dealA.S.O./Billy CeustersMuch like breakaways at the Tour de France, the polka dot jersey has changed a lot in the past couple of years. For better or worse, this eccentric jersey is losing its spark. Some argue that Pogaarand Vingegaard are diminishing the classification by removing the chances of those who come into the race specifically targeting the iconic jersey.In order to keep the King of the Mountains alive for riders in breakaways, some change is needed. More emphasis needs to be placed on climbs during stages. This will move the balance of power away from the GC guys contesting the overall fight. Perhaps a time-trial style classification could make for a novel dynamic within the race where lost climbers bury themselves in the grupetto for the polka dots. Or perhaps it aint broke at all. What do you think? Let us know in the comments below or on social media. Related Posts Is this the end of Tour de France breakaways? How much is the 2024 Tour de France prize money? Mens Tour de France 2024: Route, how to watch and all you need to know History of the Tour de France jerseys and how they got their colours The post How to fix the Tour de France King of the Mountains classification appeared first on Cyclist.

Oier Lazkano has been in many breakaways in this Tour de France 2024 and today might've been the final day where he could've gotten the win. The Movistar Team rider from Alava finished fifth in Barcelonnette but was quite disappointed with how the day turned out.He was one of the most active throug...

Comment & Analysis: In the last few days, both the Irish Independent and The Irish Times have published articles in which the author of the Dublin City Centre Traders Alliance economic report defends his worth. However, both failed to address the substantive issue of why people criticised the report.Dr Pat McCloughan, managing director of PMCA Economic Consulting, told the Independent that hes absolutely standing over the report, which tried to claim that the Dublin City Transport Plan would reduce retail spending in the City Centre by 141,253,366 in 2028.Saying that the data doesnt add up is too soft for this. How McCloughan came to his conclusions is more fantastical than that. The criticism of the report came in hard and strong. The first report on this website was the panning of the report by the Dublin Commuter Coalition, a group advocating for sustainable transport. The next morning on RTE Radio, Professor Brian Caulfield, head of Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering at Trinity College Dublin, said the consultation was not robust and did not follow international evidence from places where car use has been reduced.Then the knockout punch came from Barra Roantree, an assistant professor and director of the MSc in Economic Policy at the Department of Economics at Trinity College Dublin. In an article on TheJournal.ie he wrote that: If this analysis were submitted as an undergraduate dissertation to the university I teach in, I would fail it. It shouldnt have any role in informing the debate around the Dublin City Transport Plan.So, whats wrong with the plan, and why is the defence from its author so weak? Simplified: McCloughan combined the spending figures from a shopper survey focused on Grafton Street and Henry Street with traffic count data for a much wider area as far out as the canals.This is highly problematic as most of the traffic crossing the canals are not shoppers but commuters. This is something that business groups such as DublinTown have been saying for years that shoppers are not generally the primary source of traffic in the city centre.Dublin City Council has estimated that 60% of traffic in the core city centre passes through the area without stopping. So, the majority of motorists entering the city centre across the canals are not shoppers or spending money on dining out or going to the cinema etc.In footnote 8 of his report, McCloughan wrote: Behaviour & Attitudes for the NTA (Dublin City Centre Shopper Survey, Summer 2022) (sample size 1,477 comprising 764 people interviewed on Grafton Street and 713 on Henry Street), 55% of people making a trip into the City Centre did so for shopping, 5% for eating out, 4% for an event/cinema/theatre and 1% to go to the pub/have a drink out, which together implies that 65% visited the City Centre for retail spending (mainly shopping).However, the survey results do not imply any such thing.The city centre is defined by the council and in planning terms as inside the Canal Cordon. The survey as with any survey is limited to the respondents and the location chosen to interview people etc. In this case, people on Grafton Street and Henry Street. Its suitable for a snapshot view of things. Later in his report, however, McCloughan relies on the 65%. He states: we also need an estimate of the number of people crossing the Canal Cordon whose principal purpose for coming into the City Centre was retail spending. The relevant number is the aforementioned 65% (outlined earlier in footnote 8 in reference to the Behaviour & Attitudes survey commissioned by the NTA in 2022).Data cannot be used like this. Not correctly, in good faith, at least.McCloughan uses quick references to footnotes. If he had spelled out how he arrived at his estimates for the total spending in the city centre, it would have looked even dafter.With such a large mistake or intentional error I cannot tell or presume his motives outlined above, the report cannot be relied on at all.Thats just the primary issue with the report.There are so many layers to the problems with the report, including the fact that people shopping in more prime pedestrian streets are more likely to spend more than in the city centre overall, that a shift to sustainable modes and growth in city living will counteract any reduction in car shoppers, and that car shoppers are not being targeted by the plan but rather its focused on those who are not stopping in the core. But its worth looking a bit more at how flawed McCloughans analysis of traffic trends is. In his report, he claims: in the absence of any traffic management changes or restrictions being introduced (i.e. based on the actual travel mode share changes which occurred 2006-2019), the Draft Plan targets in 2028 would be surpassed in (1) walking and (2) public transport (bus, rail and LUAS) and would be met in (3) cars, taxis and goods vehicles. On the other hand, the targeted 13% share for cycling would not be met in 2028.Then he concludes that These findings suggest the need for fewer traffic management changes in the City Centre between now and 2028.This is based on trends alone without looking at what led the city to those trends namely, what he calls traffic management changes and restrictions. The idea, for example, that bus use can grow significantly without substantial traffic measures to enable bus priority is not tenable.The report even says that extra measures are needed to achieve the cycling targets. How, with finite space, will those extra measures be possible without significantly restricting traffic? But hold on a secondthink about what is being done here. In the same report, which outlines that if theres a drop in car use, it will be disastrous for the city centre, the author is saying the drop will happen anyway. Its a bit like the purpose of the report is to attack the transport plan and will use anything to achieve that aim, including agreeing with the targets that resulted in the plan.Outside of mashing together figures that should not mix and abstractly examining trends without examining whats behind the trends, the report does not make sense because we know lower-car city centres dont cause economic rune.The Dutch city of Utrecht, for example, has far more car restrictions than is even planned in Dublin and still has a healthy retail sector. Meanwhile, across the border in Belgium, disaster was also predicted for Ghents traffic plan, but the city has thrived under a lower-car core. The Dutch even advised them not to do it ahead of a local election.Ghent went ahead, and the politicians who supported the plan were rewarded at the election. Much like how Dublin City councillors who clearly supported the transport plan were reelected just months ahead of it being implemented some of the strongest voices for the plan topped the poll in their areas. But again hold on. Even the argument of looking at international examples is a bit of a needless distraction. Even this has us spinning around, following our tails.McCloughan outlines that the Canal Cordon Report 2022 shows that there have been significant changes in peoples travel modes in the City Centre since 2006 towards sustainable travel modes as evident in Table 1.Then, show us the money!There has been a significant shift to sustainable modes. The data is clear on that, and its accepted in the report. So, wheres the data showing the economic impact on the city centre retail? Of course, Covid and working from home have had their impacts, but the trend towards sustainable transport has not.When asked by the Irish Independentabout his previous report, which made the equally fanatical claim that the loss of just 10 car spaces in Lucan Village would result in the loss of over 300 jobs, over half of the villages jobs, he told the Independent that he was happy with the findings.He said the Lucan report was ancient history sure, wouldnt anybody who issued such unrealistic findings want the matter confined to history? As reported by this website at the time, South Dublin County Council said that the on-street parking capacity within Lucan Village is 225 spaces, and their plan would see an overall level of 215 on-street parking spaces being provided.You could say that anybody who believed that claim is gullible. But The Irish Times lapped it up, and shortly afterwards, councillors bowed to the pressure. Things are a bit different this time. The stakes for Dublin City are higher in terms of the future of the city, its climate action and its transport network. Far more people are engaged in support of the city centre transport plan.McCloughan added that the work I do is fast-paced.As far as the Dublin City Centre Transport Plan is concerned, it sure is fast. Fast and loose.

Mikel Landa has ridden through safely the 18th stage of the Tour de France and remains in fifth position. The Basque rider has been racing a virtually perfect Tour thus far and his ambitions do not end in his current position; if he has the legs he will attempt to attack Joo Almeida's fourth place...

Ben Healy (EF Education-EasyPost) today finally got into a breakaway that made it all the way at the Tour de France. Unfortunately, the Irish rider played his cards early and when they didnt go his way, he lost his best chance of the race. Not only was Healy not at the front in the final []The post Ben Healy on the attack at Tour but best chance slips away | Video appeared first on Sticky Bottle.

Javier Guilln, director of the Vuelta a Espaa, has dropped the bombshell after assuring that Primoz Roglic, Juan Ayuso, Mikel Landa and Sepp Kuss are confirmed for this year's edition, and also does not rule out the presence of Tadej Pogacar and Jonas Vingegaard. An affirmation that goes against w...

Everybody is keenly awaiting Visma | Lease a Bike's final attempt to steal Tadej Pogacar's yellow jersey from Friday onwards. However third place Remco Evenepoel points out that the Slovenian, who lives in Monaco, will have an advantage of home roads, which might come handy especially on Friday."I t...

After a Covid infection derailed his Tour de France appearance, the American is recovered, training well and will race the Spanish Grand Tour, Grischa Niermann, Visma - Lease a Bike coach, confirms.

Bart Lemmenwas very impressive throughout the eighteenth stage of Tour de France. The Dutchman ultimately only cruised across the line in Barcelonnette as sixth, however whole Visma | Lease a Bike hoped to pull the Wout Van Aert card in the final. If only the Belgian wasn't stuck in the third group...

Tadej Pogacar will only celebrate his 26th birthday this September, however it is not far-fetched to already consider him among the sport's greats. There are still three more stages to this year's Tour de France, but with a field record of 3 Grand tour GCs, 23 GT stages and 6 monuments, Pogacar's fe...