I’ve been watching the tour a fair amount this year. I see Peter Sagan completing with Sam Bennett for the Green Jersey. I have lots of questions…
If Peter Sagan is going for the green jersey but the yellow jersey is the real the “bragging rights prize” for the tour, why is he the top paid cyclist in the world (and arguably the best in the world)? Wouldn’t that be previous years yellow jersey (vs. Sagan’s history of winning the green)?
I heard the announcers referring to him as the team leader, but again wouldn’t the leader be going for the yellow jersey? Yet today, Lennard Kaemna (his team) took the stage win today and its clear Sagan isn’t even attempting that.
I understand that each stage awards points for the green jersey ranging from 20 to 50 pts depending on the type of stage (flats, mountains, etc.), but is it for a sub segment of the stage or the full stage? The announcers don’t really explain that. I don’t regularly see Sagan sprinting at the finish at the end of stages that are worth 50 pts.
Sagan is about 45 pts back from Bennett so far. It seems that Sagan has work cut out for him. What are his chances (ignoring a crash from Bennett, etc.)?
I am aware of this, but Chris Froome has won the whole Tour several times. No one outside of Tour watchers even know the green jersey. Everyone knows Lance, Froome or Wiggens as house hold names as Tour de France champions.
Point being…name the green jersey winner for the years Lance won…no one outside of cycling would even know. Yellow is touted as the true winner.
The reason that he is the best paid cyclist is firstly because of his many achievements and because of that he is the most recognizable and marketable stars of the sport.
No, not all team leaders and not even all teams go for the yellow jersey at all it seems. Many of the have goals like stage victories or some other jersey or whatever. Sagan is not attempting to win stages like today because he can’t.
There are intermediate sprints on that award points towards the green jersey. Sagan is definitely going for those when he can and also for the win on sprint stages. I don’t know why you think he does not go for stage sprint wins, he does.
More points are awarded for stage wins on flat stages, a little less on hilly stages and very little on mountain stages. This is why the points classification suits all-round riders with a good sprint - like Sagan. Pure sprinters can get dropped on hilly stages and climbers can’t contest the sprint on flat stages. I don’t know what you mean with subsection of the stage, I assume you mean the intermediate sprints and yes they give points to the green jersey.
it is not solely about race wins…it is about brand exposure for sponsors. Sagan generates more consumer interest than the combined total of all 3 winners for the Grand Tours last year.
And of the 3 names you mentioned, only 1 (Lance) is a household name.
As for Kamna winning the stage today. teams are about the wins…and today’s profile did not suit Sagan’s capabilities. The stage had way too much climbing for him, so Bora played a card that allowed them to get the stage win anyway. Win-win for the team and sponsors.
Without wishing to sound like an idiot your 1st point comes across as someone who thinks the Tour de France is the only race on the Calendar.
Sagan is a long way behind Bennett mainly because of the DQ he got for trying to get past WVA, without that it’d be much closer. (I’ll stand corrected if the points tally on that stage wasn’t causing a bigger impact).
Okay I googled this now that I got your terminology…it says points are awarded for the first cyclists to cross the finish-line or the intermediate sprint line. So that answers that question. Its not always the first person to cross the finish line of the stage. Example, the stage is say 150 km long, sometimes the points are awarded at say km point 82 (cause it demonstrated a sprint in this subsection…what you’ve taught me is the intermediate sprint line).
I believe he slipped a chain on a stage costing him significant points too.
I’m aware the Tour de France is one of the three majors. However, as a Canadian, we don’t tend to get much TV coverage of the other two (so its a bit out of sight out of mind). I’ve watched the tour de france several years in a row.
It’s one of the three grand tours but as well as those (and a gazillion more) you have the spring classics (well normally in spring anyway!!) which are MASSIVE races and arguably more exciting to watch. Flanders and Paris Roubaix are two of the “monuments” and just epic races, my personal favourite is Flanders.
