Somebody give Anna Glowinski some presenting tips or send her on a course. Its embarrassing.

Cancel it?

All your stuff, Captaindanger!
Plus - visit bike events and report back on them. The Mega bit was great - or would've been if it had been 15 minutes instead of 15 seconds!
Race reports from racers - Dan Atherton interview, fair enough, but hes done some Enduros - loadsa headcam footage and a report would've been far more interesting.

I think they need to decide their market, cos this being all things to all people isn't working. They go from first time buyers spending under a grand to that Anna Glowinski learning to 180!

(I honestly think Glowinski is the only decent thing on the show so far!)

Rob Warner

They need to figure out that people actually go into the countryside and ride bikes rather than dodge buses and taxis for kicks

The most painful thing is the interviews. So forced and unnatural and just plain dull.

Add some fun and humour to it and get some presenters with a bit more charisma.

I think part of the issue is that it is too broad, trying to cover all aspects of cycling rather than the more interesting niche aspects. They almost seem like public service programmes.....

I'd like to see a Top Gear/Gadget Show cross for bikes.

Anna Glowinski learning to 180 was painful, Sam is amazing but isnt an instructor and it was just bad TV.

Do some things well rather than trying to do lots of things and doing it badly.

Actually- just watch the Adventure Show then copy it.

Another one for interviews, some of the writers who've done books about touring would work, as they have stories to tell

If they could get the background noise down in the 'studio' I think it'd help
I'm not sure whether a top gear style audience milling around would be benficial or not? rather than seemingly uninterested people in the background?

Agree on the need for helmet cam footage/vidoes, they wouldn't have to be long or well edited 'features', just stick them over the top of the guests as they talk, or get the guests to talk over them or have a big tv and zoom into it?
Might make Dan and Sam for eg to be a little more interesting to listen to (for at least)

I would change bike porn to "Review content" - so the know what you mean 😉

As an example, they had someone ride two mountain bikes. Then choose one. Why? what was the difference in kit. Even they do it low level And the Recon is a better fork than the dart, or other simplistic nonsense, in this area they are not living up to the demands of the audience. Show me nice things...

2 - industry behind the scenes, theres a very good angle could be taken here, a series on british manufacturing, I'm sure Hope would show them round their new place.

3 - doubt they can afford hanger, but get exclusive use of where-ever you are, feels a bit too much like 80s youth tv, big crown or no crowd.

but mine would be

6 - Don't be afraid of using words i don't understand, there is an internet, I can look it up! Not saying be needlessly obscure, but don't pander, this would also allow you to do better review sections.

7 - While it makes low cost TV, too much chat risks making the valuable and much needed hour long segment look full of fluff. There seems now space to expand the features. From show 5 these would be Anna learning tricks - could have been extended to her having a days coaching, with a little montage and then at the end we see her having progressed and Cycle2work - both test riders riding a bike for a bit, then giving their impressions of the bike. The choices they made, economy for the commute bike and expenditure for the mountain bike were pretty accurate reflections of the real world, would have been nice to hear more about them, and would have tied into a review feature. Make better use of editing for the features as well, cut Annas 4 attempts at 180 together, 15 seconds, rather than 3 minutes.

8 - stop being afraid of brand names, have not heard the name Shimano, Sram Campagnola once yet and we're in week 5, that's like Top Gear never having mentioned Ford, Audi or Ferrari in a series, its just odd...

running commentary on their headcam footage!

A long term test of man( or woman ) and machine.
Maybe following a Mike Hall type journey ,showing some highlights.
Maybe a newbie training for some big event ([b]NOT[/b] Tour of Francis types ) and following their experiences .

People who only commute or are interested in buying a first bike are NOT going to be interested in watching a whole hour of TV about it.

2 - industry behind the scenes, theres a very good angle could be taken here, a series on british manufacturing, I'm sure Hope would show them round their new place.

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/good-news/9482165/How-to-build-a-Brompton-bike-from-start-to-finish.html ]Like this sort of thing, you mean? telegraph series of videos on Brompton - More links on page. [/url]

It's better at an hour long but there are still some wierd issues going on with some of the filmed segments (colour, sound level etc) that just make it look a bit thrown together. The interviews are more like chats over coffee at the moment - better questions/better guests would help. And maybe have more than one presenter at the cafe - it seems that the main man is 100% roadie and isn't that interested in BMX/cross/MTB/anything else. Finding someone who can present on those areas might make them feel a bit more part of the show and a bit less like time fillers between the roadie/commuter bits.

Like this sort of thing, you mean? telegraph series of videos on Brompton - More links on page.

Yes, AND also that as a master class in editing to make what would be boring if each shot was 5 minutes, to something which is awesome, and I went back and watched again...

It's not really aimed at STW people, so don't expect to like it.

With a broader mind the following bits were 'OK'

Interview with Wiggins about his thoughts on women in road-racing
Brompton racing (that looked brill)
The wooden bike thing (could have been better if they showed it doing timed runs etc)

C

The most painful thing is the interviews. So forced and unnatural and just plain dull.

Even including some basic continuity would be a start. Either the material is badly constructed or even more badly edited. Tangent jumping of the highest order.

Snipers...see who is still alive at the end

It just does not work...problem is petrol head sliek anything petrol related

here ww would argue about darkside, cross, 29er , slopestyle never mind BMX and dirt

Would we wathc 10 or 15 mins on the electronic gear shifting on road bikes?

Not suree= they know what they want to do or achieve and I hope to god it is not what they are currently putting out as it is just rubbish.

There's one problem they'll never overcome, cycling - on the whole - makes poor TV
Sure there's one or two exceptions but generally it's boring unless you're doing it - IMO of course 🙂

DezB - Member

The most painful thing is the interviews. So forced and unnatural and just plain dull.

captaindanger - Member

Another one for interviews, some of the writers who've done books about touring would work, as they have stories to tell

rocketman - Member

Rob Warner

a weekly "What tyres for..." segment

t_i_m - Member

a weekly "What tyres for..." segment

would we wathc 10 or 15 mins on the electronic gear shifting on road bikes?

If it was presented by someone from the James May school of explaining things to me like an adult, I probably would actually.

[i]ChrisE - Member
It's not really aimed at STW people, so don't expect to like it.[/i]

Huh? It's not aimed at [i]cyclists[/i]? 😆

Right, this goes out in primetime on the bbc every year...

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00wpr3m ]http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00wpr3m[/url]

Oh and this

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00pr6kc ]http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00pr6kc[/url]

So it turns out, all they need is Dougie Vipond knocking himself unconscious, and our own STW Maddest Of The Mad. Now the adventure show's not all (or even mostly) mtb but when they do it, they do it well.

3. Get out of "look mum no hands", it might be cheap but just looks awkward, get a studio or at least a top gear style hangar

I don't get the point of the whole "studio in a cafe" thing, it just looks unproffesional and interviews are a ball ache because of the background noise. At least do it in a bike shop.

Fifth gear was filmed with a "studio in a cafe" thing and we all now how crap it was.

4. New tech - bike geeks love tech, show us some shiny stuff from the trade shows

I guess the show is more aimed at people new to cycling, talking about the latest dropper post will bore more people. However I think that up coming shows and events should be mentioned for those who are interested.

When Sam was teaching Anna, I though that segment would make a great opportunity to demonstrate what some of the MTB skills courses have to offer. Should have sent her to Jedi 😛

A map of where skills centres are located around the UK and use Anna as a demonstration of what you could learn.

I think going into depth about what each area of MTB is would be good:
So a thorough definition for XC, DH, DJ, AM, FR.

The presenters are quite good, I like them. So happy that they aren't "gettin down wit da kidz, being stoked cos they're sick init"

I would split the program into two halves 30 minutes of Road, 30 minutes of MTB.

"star on a reasonably priced bike"

Every week send a famous/celeb/pro cyclist down a black run on a shopper. Time it and stick it on a board.

I think it's getting better week on week. I guess they'll find out who is watching and start to tailor it to them over time. Cycling is a very broad subject to cover.

It just does not work...problem is petrol head sliek anything petrol related

I think petrol heads are just as likely to argue about brands of car or front, rear or 4 wheel drive, whether rally drivers or F1 drivers are the best etc etc.
The cycle shows biggest issues are the main presenter is inexperienced and doesn't seem comfortable interviewing people. Which is apparent when he keeps repeating the same phrases. The fact it looks like its literally thrown together in the edit and some of the feature ideas are just poor. The Rob Hayles puncture thing being a prime example.
I think it can cater for everyone, but not all in the same week.

"star on a reasonably priced bike"

Every week send a famous/celeb/pro cyclist down a black run on a shopper. Time it and stick it on a board.

I'd pay actual money to watch that.

"star on a reasonably priced bike"

Every week send a famous/celeb/pro cyclist down a black run on a shopper. Time it and stick it on a board.

And a £100 challenge, each of the presenters have to buy Second hand bike or a Halfords special and do a series of challenges.

And a £100 challenge, each of the presenters have to buy a bike Second hand or a Halfords special and do a series of challenges.

We once seriously considered doing this, getting 50 pound bikes and seeing who could make it round GT...

EDIT :-serious point to be made from this, shops like Halfords selling "mountain bikes" not fit to be taken off road [or on road for that matter].

Those are great ideas

Better production values would be top of my wishlist. The presenters aren't the best but I guess they've got who they could afford...

I think going into depth about what each area of MTB is would be good:
So a thorough definition for XC, DH, DJ, AM, FR.

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to face/palm

Does the general public really need to know the subtle differences between All Mountain and Freeride? I'm a mountain biker and I don't actually care myself...

The Rob Hayles puncture thing being a prime example.

That was particularly awkward! I can see what they were trying to do, but it was just a totally pointless feature. He didn't show anything about controlling the bike, which may prove vaguely useful to some people.

It's good it's getting TV coverage, but it certainly needs work, I think the points herein cover it!

He didn't show anything about controlling the bike, which may prove vaguely useful to some people.

Yeah exactly. I thought it was particularly useful when he said we'll try and get a puncture in the rear as if you get one in the front you're pretty much screwed (or words to that effect).

I don't find it too bad to be honest. The anchor man comes across as personable and engages pretty well with his interviewees.

However, Anna would definitely benefit from some media and presenter training. Just because you are enthusiatic about a sport doesn't mean that you are capable of conveying the sport in an interesting and engaging manner to the viewer. I cringe every time she comes on while Rob Hayles doesn't come across as a natural TV presenter. The piece on small wheeled commuter bikes was a bit of a low point and elicited some fairly harsh comments from my good lady when it came on. 😀

I remain to be convinced that all the presenters need to be cyclists though.

Overall, I think the producers have a pretty decent show on their hands which with a bit of tweaking could be really rather good.

Regarding the brand names question, I'm not sure if there is an issue with this or not.

During the Stephen Roche interview there was a bike on the shelf behind one of them with what looked like yellow tape across the brand name. It looked very much to me like this was intentional, like someone somewhere wanted to avoid product placement.

If true, it might be why they're generally reluctant to talk about anything specific in terms of bikes and components, unless there is a good reason (that Aston bike for example).

Otherwise agree with most/all of the comments here. It seems to be a very cautious effort, low budget, not much information (There was no explanation of what 'Enduro' is that Dan Atherton does - people probably think that 'Mountain Biking' is one single event - that everyone rides around the countryside like in the Olympics).

How about mixing bike porn and reviews, show some top end race bike (road/mountain) and then consider the more affordable alternatives that give a similar experience.

eg. S-Works Stumpjumper race bike (or something more obscure) or somesuch, followed by showing all the lower budget Stumpjumpers, and even Rockhoppers for the cost conscious. Explain how the kit differs, benefits of hydraulic discs etc.

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to face/palm

Does the general public really need to know the subtle differences between All Mountain and Freeride? I'm a mountain biker and I don't actually care myself...

The thing is, that those acronyms/names will be used through the show (and the cycle industry) , so I think they should be defined first.

Like last night they said that Sam Pilgrim was a freerider, then showed him in action doing flips in a skate park. Now even I'm confused.

DezB - Member
ChrisE - Member
It's not really aimed at STW people, so don't expect to like it.

Huh? It's not aimed at cyclists?

So you think STW is a good indicator of what cycling is about? Ha!

People constantly asking 'show me your .....bike with pink stickers on....with some silly gearing......with niche forks.....etc'

generally reluctant to talk about anything specific in terms of bikes and component

this would be a fail for a bike show IMO. I don't watch much TV so can't speak to other programs, I know Top gear always talk about who made whih engine, which brands have sensible approaches, which ones are a bit crazy. In the bike buying features, I see no harm in saying heres a Ragley Blue Pig, with X,Y,Z, and here's a ghost it has A, B, and C.

bot A and X are midrange drivechains in Shimano and Srams line up, while the B forks offer better adjustability than Y, the Z brakes are often considered to be more powerful than their avid counterpart C.

Surely part of getting people into cycling is opening their eyes to the differences in components etc. I know this was something I didn't fully understand when buying my entry level bike, and to an extent the one that followed it as well.

eg. S-Works Stumpjumper race bike (or something more obscure) or somesuch, followed by showing all the lower budget Stumpjumpers, and even Rockhoppers for the cost conscious. Explain how the kit differs, benefits of hydraulic discs etc.

Seriously?! No one cares! Certainly not someone getting into cycling as a result of seeing the Olympics or hearing about the TdF.

The majority of the general public are just about aware of "a bike", even most tech geeks don't care about the differences between XT and SLX surely?

It's a really difficult remit they've given themselves. "Cycling" covers everything from Obree on his insane face down recumbent to a commuter on a Brompton, to someone doing backflips, to Sportives, track racing and (as mentioned above) MTB could be an entire series in itself - XC, DH, 4X, "freeride", trials. It's a HUGE spectrum.

I can see what they're trying to do - a few wide articles saying "hey look, this is bikes" Leave it at that. It's much better at 1hr and it continues to improve as they've tweaked the format. Bit more banter and natural interviews, don't try and go in depth with asking about kit; you're going to bore everyone who doesn't know about it and embarrass everyone who does know about it.

Crazy-legs - you've sussed it!

(very few other STWers have)

C

I disagree, people who are just getting into bikes aren't going to watch it though are they, as it's even less interesting to them.

It's a HUGE spectrum.

doesn't mean it doesn't have details. Imagine if Top Gear never mentioned anything specific. I personally couldn't give a flying hoot for cars, but I find James May getting excited about car technology really interesting.

stop being afraid of brand names

have some of those guys paid to be there? either show all brands or show none.

Decide who it's aimed at. I went for a bath as there was nowt on the telly! It reminds me of all those American documentaries where after every set of ads they repeat the bits before the ads.
Get rid of all the over excited fake bits.
And get rid of anyone who isn't a serious rider. A newbie to cycling is more likely to pay interest to a name rather than a TV star and experienced cyclist won't slag it off. I vote for Sean Kelly as the main presenter. Paired with Duffield of course.

Fort Boyard or that other thing with Anneka Rice, thats what it reminds me of!

Get rid of the presenter the chap who cant smile and seeems bored, bring in Mark Cavendish, Chris Boardman and Rob Hayles, for a Top Gear look, get rid of the people in the background, watching someone eat badly is off putting, otherwise each week it gets better.

Are they actually going to have a mountain bike feature and some off road or cyclepath action.

And do they they realy need such long advert breaks,

doesn't mean it doesn't have details. Imagine if Top Gear never mentioned anything specific. I personally couldn't give a flying hoot for cars, but I find James May getting excited about car technology really interesting.

Top Gear follows a well worn format. It's an entertainment show using cars as a backdrop and everyone watching knows that it's basically a vehicle (pun intended) for 3 middle aged blokes to cock about with cars/machinery in exotic locations. It's funny. I'm not particularly "into" cars but I find the childish humour mostly appeals to me.

Think about it - when does TG get boring? When they bang on about cars and the difference between a Ford Fiesta and a Ford Focus like the old TG used to and 5th Gear tried to do. DULL!!

We tune in every week to try and support the viewing figures but I must admit I do find it very frustrating. Having said that I also struggle to think how they could change it so everyone was happy because their potential audience is so diverse and into so many different things.

I know last night we were thinking the Splinter bikes thing was a bit different and a bit interesting but they spent all of about a minute showing that, and yet they seemed to talk at length to people doing the Brompton racing specifically about their outfits (I really don't care how much that woman loved the colour purple...! Or how you tie a bow tie!?)

I agree there should be less interviews too - certainly less in that formal on a sofa in the cafe environment, everybody looks quite awkward and the whole thing feels a bit forced. And no one in the audience behind seems very interested. They should get more people chatting out and about while they demonstrate stuff - I'd far rather have seen more of that Atherton brother in action on a bike and showing us firsthand what he does, than sat on the couch and mumbling on in his somewhat monotone voice about nothing much.
Maybe they could have dragged themselves away from London and gone to visit him in Wales?

I've personally not really once identified with any of the different styles of riding featured on it either. Often me and him have sat there thinking: yes, but what about those of us who just simply take to the countryside at the weekend for a bit of fun and sociability? I think many people just think of mountain biking as serious full-face GNAR, when in fact there's those of us who also like their rides to feature cake/ice cream stops too....

We tune in every week to try and support the viewing figures

Are you a member of the BARB viewers panel?

As I had to look up what BARB is, that'll be a no then!

So, even less point in us watching at all now 🙄

For those of us that are enthusiastic about biking, read biking publications and/or frequent the forums. What are we expecting to see that we haven't already? We're on here criticising, myself included and now I've thought about it there's not much they could show that would interest me. Highlights of certain races is always good, but you can get all that online.
It really was sending me to sleep last night, so at least it was good for that.

They could do a 5 min 'classic routes' segment, whether that's on/off road. Presenter/guest go and ride it, show us some nice film of the good/famous/infamous bits,tea stops, best crashes etc. Loads of scope and it might inspire all these people with new post-Olympic bikes to go & ride somewhere new, while the mighty STW massive can chortle at their inappropriate choice of tyres.

I think the top gear format would be great, since most cars are designed with a mundane purpose and TG makes them fun. Whereas all bikes are designed for fun, therefore having some guys and girls mess about on bikes would be good to watch, trying out each of the different aspects of bicycles. This week it's 4X next week it's CX and so on.

The thing about TG is that it fuses boring techy stuff with entertaining fun stuff. Like the episode where they build a caterham, that could have been a boring "blokes in a shed with spanners" episode, but it wasn't because they were in a race.

They think what is bikeporn is the samething that the Sunday Times would choose.

The 180 was terrible.

It lacks warmth or soul. Abit like 90s Top Gear.

The cycle show is improving. It feels a bit too early to slate it.

They have some good ideas for features, but then don't really execute them well.

For instance they did a comparison of folding bikes. They barely talked about the design, components, cost, weight. Things you would need to know if you were in the market for one. So it wasn't informative, and the race bit was pretty lame.

Same as the feature on the wooden bike. Could have been interesting but they didn't talk much about the design, geometry, drivetrain. How does it work? How fast does it go?

I think maybe they're too scared to get to techy so as not to alienate newbies, but I think they need to aim a bit higher or more the serious cyclists will turn off.

I like the presenters, they've had good guests too. I hope it improves anyway as I think it could be really good.

crazy-legs

Think about it - when does TG get boring? When they bang on about cars and the difference between a Ford Fiesta and a Ford Focus like the old TG used to and 5th Gear tried to do. DULL!!

Totally disagree. What you've described is part of the reason that me, my dad, most people I know have totally switched off top gear and car barely sit through an episode. You've mentioned "the difference between a fiesta and a focus" to heighten your dullness arguement, but really, the show is now totally bereft of any actual information about cars other than bhp, 0-60 and maximum speed.

It's funny. I'm not particularly "into" cars but I find the childish humour mostly appeals to me.

Well, that explains it. I am. I am "into bikes" too. I would venture to say that if the cycle show attempted to ape TG's style, ie entertainment over content everyone here would be similarly irate at the lack of factual content or the inacurracies or the wrongness of their "expert opinions" etc etc.

Imagine the STW backlash if a TV programme were to state whether 29ers were better than 26ers or how full sus compares to hardtails, or whether you needed a big ring or any of the other anally retentive geek fodder people fight about on here. People here are not representative of ordinairy cyclists, never mind ordinairy people.

Were they to attempt this it would stand or fall on the strength of the main characters, their interaction and the inventiveness of their features. I doubt they could achieve this on a limited budget.

I think it's getting better and my mum enjoys it on the whole and she's more their target audience.

I think they should look to do a bit more of a race report, doesn't need to be much a minute or two covering some larger events. An in your area type section where they look at an area and look at the riding available & biker friendly facilities.

The problem is budget, go film a 5 minute section offsite and you need to pay 2-3 people for a day, get people in to plug their thing then you maybe pay travel for them and have 1 hr filming costs. Maybe if it gets decent viewing then next time they get more budget and can make it a bit better.

The bike polo segment was brilliant.

Can't believe how many people are moaning about this show. I quite like the ramshackle nature of it, the interviews are interesting and quite natural. The programme has a bit of a unpredictable quality to it which is rare these days and should be applauded.
All a lot of people on here seem to do is pick holes in things like this and whinge about them, is it because really, you don't like seeing cycling being promoted and becoming popular God forbid?

This inspired me to google Top Gear episode 1 season 1. It doesn't have James May in it! It's also every bit as dull as the cycle show is now so it shows these things take time

[url= http://www.streetfire.net/video/top-gear-season-11_683234.htm ]http://www.streetfire.net/video/top-gear-season-11_683234.htm[/url]

It's great to see any cycling on TV, would love to see the Rob Warner commentated DH coverage.

For the Cycle Show though;
- do less, better
- look at cycling coverage in online videos, not all big budget stuff, but makes it look so much better
- get out of London

Countryfile cover cycling better on the rare occasions they do.

They ought to try something new, for example they could take a DH bike and race it downhill to see if it could go faster than a Renault Clio or something like that. Or maybe they could take a road bike, a mountain bike and a folding bike and see which is quicker on a no holds barred race across London...

...nah, that kind of show would never catch on.

Do less better - agree with that - make features proper features not badly done snippets. Get out of London +1

Good to see cycling on the TV though

the interviews are interesting and quite natural.

I thought the opposite.

Hopefully it'll get better, providing they get the audience figures to justify more episodes, so keep watching even though it's crap.

Markrh its stilted and lacks flow and energy.
They all seem obliged to present. Anna has the most oomph. I think its the Director/Editors fault.