It’s not unknown to any cycling fan by this point that the once world-beating squad of Ineos Grenadiers has been some way off the top in the last few years, failing to win a Grand Tour since Egan Bernal took the pink jersey at the Giro d’Italia in 2021.
With one of the team’s stars Tom Pidcock leaving on not-so-amicable terms to join Q36.5 Pro Cycling last month, it only looks like things will get more difficult before they get better for the British team — and the team’s new personnel, with Scott Drawer in his second year as the Performance Director, along with Zak Dempster and Kurt Arvesen coming in as directeur sportifs to replace the outgoing Steve Cummings, are not afraid to accept that.
> "Dysfunctional clown show": Cycling fans react to Tom Pidcock's departure and accuse Ineos Grenadiers of "complete lack of ambition" and "monumental" decline
Speaking to Cyclingnews, Arvesen said: “We need to come back and win bike races, start to win stages. Every race counts. It might take one, two, three or four years before we’re back, winning a Grand Tour, but I'm convinced we’re going to be.
“There are only three Grand Tours, there’s only only three winners, so it’s very difficult.”
But there’s still concern about team owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s commitment to funding the team — the British billionaire of course has another arguably more lucrative ‘sinking ship’ project to focus on in Manchester United with Portuguese manager Ruben Amorim at the helm.
Despite Ineos Grenadiers’ CEO John Allert confirming the team will exist until the 2028 UCI WorldTour and praising the owners for being “very passionate about this sport”, he confirmed the team was in fact, seeking out a second title sponsor.
“It’s fair to say that Ineos don’t want to spend more money,” Allert said. “So it depends entirely on what happens with this commercial activity. They very clearly do want us to be a super team and they know what it takes to be a super team. I'm not going to put a number on that, but it’s a number that's greater than what we're currently spending.
“You don’t need to be that clued-up to realise there’s a reason why we’re trying to bring other people on that journey with us. There’s value to be created for other brands and we don’t necessarily feel we have to, need to, or want to, go it alone.
“I’ve heard some bonkers rumours in the last couple of weeks about people buying us or investing in us or whatever else.
“We certainly have a commercial strategy that is an evolution of our strategy. We’ve appointed an agency and we're looking at commercial partnership opportunities, like most other teams are.
“It’s a very crowded market. We haven't signed anybody. I'm not aware of us imminently signing anybody.”
> “Team Circus continues”: Tom Pidcock dropped by Ineos due to risk of bonus payout claims Brian Smith, who says there’s “no fun in numbers-driven cycling anymore” as “gagged” Steve Cummings confirms exit
Drawer also spoke about the rapid pace at which the sport is changing, from the rise of Tadej Pogačar and other young riders to the growth of the big-budget super teams, and even new performance science such as the ability to ingest more carbohydrates during races and so race longer and harder.
He said: “Some of the most critical things that have probably shaped why we’ve reshaped ourselves are based on the changes that have really happened in the sport.
“I think the trends in racing, particularly pre and post-COVID have changed the nature of the type of cyclists that are now in the peloton. So we've restructured ourselves and set ourselves up to get ahead of that slightly for this year and for the future.
“Our motivation in our approach to racing is going to be very different, and then there will be a bigger investment in talent.
“It’s probably one that we've got behind the curve on, but one that we're really accelerating to get ahead of the curveball.
“You’ve heard some news, and there'll be a lot more news coming out around our importance in that space.”
Add new comment
100 comments
All part of the UK fetid toxic culture of social media and driver-centric anger against people trying to ride a bicycle.
I read that Guardian article this morning. It did seem like a few hundred words of filler for a fee. Bells in East London: not heard due to headphones or generate angry reaction, so best not used. Even a polite "Excuse me..." can kick off rage but at least one such experience was understandable when I saw the quite large group of cyclists that would have gone past the angry individual a few minutes earlier - not nice people.
Runners are worst. The serious runners are in a zone and brook no-one being in a position to upset their stride. Have to admit I had to fight that instinct in myself when I was younger and running hard. On canal paths and other shared use paths, I'll be on the 7-speed urban bike and, consequently, less pumped up than running
Well they're not true cockneys then.
https://www.bells.org/blog/you-are-true-cockney-if-you-hear-bow-bells
Yes (and there's almost no cycling infra up here) I've experienced fairly vigorous criticism for saying hello and not ringing a bell, or for going 'ding ding'. In the past I have rung a bell and had the reactions mentioned below. So I'm sticking with hello
Not sure how people react to bells in Australia, but here it can get you comments such as "Don't ring your ******* bell at me!!!"
Could this be Lancs Police ?!
https://youtu.be/IXAQDrTBgHg?t=423
Could this be Lancs Police ?!
Nothing to say it isn't! They could have prepared a justification for NFA in the unlikely event of them being 'held to account': "driver was indicating, which makes it legal", a police officer must witness the event, confirmatory video required from the offending vehicle, only a momentary loss of concentration and even (to show they're looking out for dodges from other forces) : driver has no recollection of the incident etc.
TLDR: people are becoming self entitled dicks.
The whole passing people business is becoming increasingly difficult.
On my rides (city based so canal and river paths etc) I encounter loads of people wearing noise cancelling headphones. I use my bell then when that doesn't work say "excuse me can I squeeze past" and often land up saying that several times louder each time.
And yet I still get shouted at for "creeping up" on people from behind.
Then there's runners who have a very consistent behaviour of swapping the side of the path they are on right at the last minute - moving from the other side to my side and running straight towards me and then telling me to "watch" where I'm going. It's akin to magnets pulling towards each other.
I also got whacked across the head with a walking stick by an elderly "gentleman" who took offence at me using my bell to alert him of my presence. That was after slowing down and cycling behind him for 20-30 m clicking my brake levers and saying "hello can I get past" a couple of times.
When on a shared path I slow down, unlcip my foot from the pedal and the noise of the SPD cleat clicking in and out several times usually alerts pedestrians and I always say thank you. I don't use a bell. Recently, I came to a stop and said 'excuse me' to a group of three walkers who were blocking a shared path. They turned on me and started berating me for NOT using a bell. 'But I've come to a complete stop and politely asked you to excuse me'.
Sometimes, you just can't win.
The ramblers (often retired folk) on the TPT can often be the most territorial and passive-aggressive bunch. They have to make a huge drama about cyclist passing.
At times, I find the TPT painful to use and a no-go on bank holidays or weekends.
Dogs are often the biggest problem. The shared path is treated like a dog park. Dog leads many meters long. Dogs running under your wheel. Use a park to play fetch with your stupid dog not a shared path.
The path is very wide in places but walkers and dog owners want to use the entire width.
The Guardian article cited their right of way but by the same token the Highway Code says not to block the path. They know it's a shared path so why so take the whole width?
Why am I made to feel like their guest on a shared path? Most paths in Cheshire, I'm not allowed to cycle on, but dog owners and walkers must also dominate the TPT!?
I downloaded a sound clip of a bus engine idling and play it on loop via a bluetooth speaker on the handlebars - works a treat with pedestrians on shared paths / park roads.
Strangely, they dutifully move to the side when they hear the rumble of a large vehicle's engine coming up behind them. It's almost like they've been trained.
I find ringing a bicycle bell can have very mixed results. From being thanked for having a bell, to being chastised for having the temeritry to use it. From being completely ignored, to suddenly scattering in a wild panic. You just never know what you're going to get!
Thanks! This is what we need - market research.
What is the best noise for effecting notification of pedestrians (and ideally predictable lateral movement to leave room to progress) without triggering a negative emotional response *?
I wonder if you could volunteer and try a few different ones (I may try this game myself also)?
Car (road noise)
Sports car revving / accellerating
2 stroke motorbike engine
Rumble of approaching truck
Whine of e-motorbike motor
Perhaps throw in a few different ones as controls: noise of charging rugby forwards / herd of cows, horse trotting, steam train, helicopter etc?
PS. Also agree on the bell - quite mixed responses (but you definitely can't win in every case anyway) and now if definitely safe to do so I pass slowly - without any special alert other than perhaps coughing / changing gear. And assume that any given person may be deaf.
* Probably a contradiction here - a very few folks won't shift without being in fear of mortal danger.
I recently saw (and heard) a guy on a bike in Brazil with a white noise generator that sounded intermittently (but regularly). It seemed effective but would probably drive me mad as a rider.
I think there's two things going on with it. One is that, for some reason, some pedestrians seem more agreeable to making way for a motorised vehicle than a bicycle. The other is the continuous sound allows them to gradually become aware of an approaching vehicle as it gets steadily louder, rather than being startled by silence interrupted with a loud ringing/honking.
Perhaps the best option would be an audible alert, akin to what electric vehicles now have to emit below a certain speed. This can be linked to the speed of the bicycle, so it changes tone with changes in speed.
Calling HoarseMann!
Please see Rendel's Met. topic about their so-far non-materialised copy of the Northamptonshire scheme to inform victims of outcomes, to see my request to you
Spokey dokeys! (you'd have to be going slowly though)
Or even a broken deraillieur for a rave-up...
Hmm... it all comes back to Trotify, it seems.
Sometimes I think I should just min-max my bell and strap an air horn to my handlebar. It would deal with the typical runner with headphones, and the otherwise hard of hearing.
Those pedestrians on shared paths that walk several abreast blocking the path always Anony me, along with dog walkers with their dogs on long leads across the path.
They annoy me as cyclist, runner, and pedestrian. Age 69, I walk nearly 15 minutes an hour faster than Google Maps expects. Consequently, I walk faster than such groups but it can be very difficult to get past until I almost yell, "Excuse me" and shove my way through. Obviously, I can't do that on bike and the handlebars make me wider.
If you're going so fast you warp time to that extent, you're definitely a danger to all other traffic, and should consider slowing down.
This is more true than you may think - apparently several acquaintances now define the quickest route between two points in the universe not as the time light takes to travel it but whatever Google's prediction is. Further - such journeys are not expected to take much longer either - "well that's what Google says".
Same on the TPT. They feel it's their right to dominate all spaces. Strictly, they should never block the path where it's wider than single-track.
Top marks for "Tour Brown Under"
shared paths are just an excuse to avoid putting in proper infrastructure - anyhow used to have a bell and got fed up of people jumping into my path so....
I now have a very loud rear hub on my commuter - sounds like angry wasps - people then turn around to see wtf is heading in their direction - works well
Yes - or at best they bake in a low limit to active travel by a) giving authorities an excuse to limiting space and put infra "where it can be done" not where people want to go b) ensuring that as more people use it there will be more conflict between modes c) ensuring there will be conflict anyway.
Having said that the shared-use former railway lines around North Edinburgh are a great resource for me - because of (mostly) rather low use.
Once you work out how much time you spend sat not moving on urban roads (e.g. junctions, traffic lights, pedestrian crossings) you realise even slowing right down for a few walkers is not an impediment by comparison.
Except on the uphill bits; freehubs tend to be a bit quieter then.
Trotify will still work for you though... (more sonic skeuomorphs - restoring the "nag" to "poor-man's nag").
I usually avoid shared paths, except for easy leisure off road rides. Rather than use a bell, I shout "ding a ling a ling", when approaching pedestrians. It means I have both hands on the handlebars and can steer and brake more efficiently.
Ooh - that's a fancy bell noise
Chuck Berry?
Pages