I ask myself what it is that I want from the Tour. Mainly it's to sit down to watch the highlights show in the summer, with the predictable rythym of the race schedules, marvelling at the shots the cameramen come up with, and trying to get the department numbers before they come up on the screen. It's about knowing enough background to be able to poo-poo, (Or should that be Poupou) the commentary in front of your mates, when the commentary is only supposed to be inclusive to a general audience anyway. It's about inferring character from a grimace or a flick of the elbow. I've never felt it was fixed like television wrestling, but it's obviously not 'Chariots of Fire'.
It's corrupt, and the race often goes to those with the sharpest elbows and the biggest ego, but that's a lot like life. I look at Hamilton and I ask why he was never a contender. He rode as fast as Armstrong, a Gold medal in the 2004 TT proved that. It's down to the character faults we see in the Hardtalk interview, which reminded me of the thwarted character in a gangster movie who ends up in cement boots at the bottom of the Hudson River, when he's squealed to the Feds, and then been hung out to dry. These long form interviews are actually extending the pleasure I get from the Tour, rather than detracting from a Corinthian ideal which I've neither expected nor demanded from three weeks in July.
It's up to me how I consume the dish that the ASO puts before me, and I'm minded to think that too many cooks spoil the broth.