“£31 a month, asks ChatGPT to make a video”: Cycling fans accuse TNT Sports of “insulting” the Tour de France with “impressively awful AI slop” history series; Tadej Pogačar ditches final pre-Tour altitude camp + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
“£31 a month, asks ChatGPT to make a video”: Cycling fans accuse TNT Sports of “insulting” the Tour de France with “impressively awful AI slop” history series
Me, standing atop the Col d’Aubisque, holding my phone, watching another ChatGPT-generated cycling video: ‘Assassins, you’re all artificial assassins, killing off the poor graphic designers…’
Seriously, what’s going on with cycling and AI this week?
Yesterday, we had that horrific dystopian bike ad from American clothing manufacturer REI (though who knows, maybe a second set of bars protruding from the saddle is the next big thing over in the States?).
And now, TNT Sports have decided to up the ante, getting us all excited for the start of cycling’s biggest race by posting this, ahem, ‘interesting’ short video ‘celebrating’ the Tour de France’s first dramatic, much-mythologised venture into the Pyrenees in 1910.
Brace yourself:
View this post on Instagram
I don’t know where to begin.
The terrible scribbly L’Auto newspaper at the start. The way Octave Lapize’s bike occasionally morphs into a modern aero racer, or the way his bike has space for a frame-mounted bottle cage, which wouldn’t come into fashion for at least another 30 years.
Or the way, for some reason, the video moves Lapize’s iconic, mythologised cry of ‘assassins’ in the direction of the race organisers (a moment, like many of the early Tours’ legends, distorted and embellished over time) from the top of the Aubisque to the finish in Bayonne. Come on AI, at least have him screaming on the Tourmalet, like many a lazy hack has over the years.
Or the way AI Lapize falls to the ground in exhaustion, but doesn’t bother crossing the finish line. Or just the whole cringey, ChatGPTness of it all.
So, what’s this all about? Well, apparently, the clip marks the start of TNT’s ‘Cycling Essential Stories’ collection, a series “crafted by our journalists and brought to life visually using AI technology”.
A second episode is coming soon, TNT says. Though judging by the response from cycling fans, it may get cancelled before we reach that point.
“Bad, ugly, putting actual creatives out of work. You charge a fortune and serve up this. Bring back ITV’s beautifully crafted montages instead,” Em wrote after watching the video (presumably through her fingers), while Mike described it as “absolute slop”.
Cycling historian Tom Issit was even less impressed: “Noooo!! The story is wrong and no one needs AI shite like this. Please stop.”
“Please don’t use this slop during actual coverage,” pleaded Ben, while Alex branded the clip “impressively awful” and Chris wrote: “No one wants this AI slop. You’ve now ruined what was otherwise a great story”.
And it seems like many aren’t happy that part of their £31-a-month subscription is being spent on “AI slop”, at the expense of, you know, humans.
“You could have used the f***ing price hike you guys implemented to pay some human beings to make something good, no?” asked Laurie, while Aidan Burgess said: “Charges arm and a leg for cycling subs, can’t pay graphic designer.”
“£31 a month. Asks ChatGPT to make a video,” added Craig, and Hope wrote: “Pay a small fortune to watch live racing only for you to not be bothered to pay real humans to create art and instead opt for AI slop. Do better.”
On that note, M Bowden said: “As somebody who has worked in the creative industry, this AI slop is nothing short of insulting to an extremely talented industry in the UK. I’m delighted to have cancelled my subscription.”
“So you guys not charging us enough already?” asked Josh. “Need to up subscription costs to pay for real artists. What utter BS.”
“Cheap AI shit. This is an insult to the Tour. You should be ashamed,” said The Test Lab, while Ollie made the point that “imagine how good this would have been without AI”. But the costs of paying a human Ollie, the costs!
“Generative AI use is for the morally bankrupt. Do better TNT Sports!!!” urged Emily.
And finally, Louis asked: “Can you not go five minutes without embarrassing yourself, TNT Sports?”
To be fair, though, after trawling through all these, ahem, constructive critiques, I did find one positive remark, from James.
“Great content as always,” he said.
Let’s just assume he’s being serious…
Tadej Pogačar ditches final pre-Tour de France altitude training camp to return home to Monaco after partner Urška Žigart’s Tour de Suisse crash
In a sport where no stone is, seemingly, left unturned in the quest for top form, it turns out Tadej Pogačar can do what he wants.
The world champion, fresh from another oppressively dominant display at the Tour de Suisse last week, was set to join his UAE teammates at Isola 2000 in the French Alps, for a last round of altitude training before the Tour de France starts in Barcelona.
Pogačar, however, has decided to miss at least the start of this short stint on top of a mountain, the four-time Tour winner opting instead to return home to Monaco and spend some time with his partner Urška Žigart, who crashed heavily during the women’s Tour de Suisse, fracturing her jaw.
“I changed a lot of plans in the last two weeks,” Pogačar said after the race. “Now that Urška is recovering, her plans collapsed, my second plan collapsed, and now it’s the third plan and maybe in two days it will be plan four.
“The most important thing is that we stay together the next few days and we see how it is.”
UAE Team Emirates have since stated that their leader’s plans for this week are “still to be confirmed”.
To be honest, I know pro cyclists love an altitude camp these days, but if anyone can afford to miss one in the lead-up to the Tour – and benefit from a mental reset, if we’re honest – it’s Tadej Pogačar.
‘Completely block the bike lane, but make it look nice’
Those pesky Bucharest trees, so inconsiderate of us cyclists…
When in Bucharest this weekend, we made a pilgrimage to see a tree growing in the middle of a bike lane.
For bike nerds, this is our Mona Lisa. Our Stonehenge. Our Colosseum.
A sacred site. A cautionary tale. A monument to the eternal struggle between infrastructure design and existing conditions.
— Melissa & Chris Bruntlett (@modacitylife.com) June 21, 2026 at 8:56 PM
“By the end only one bolt was holding it on, so I was making sure I just kept the weight against the front of the shoe to keep the cleat in the same place… and luckily it stayed on!”
In case you missed it last night, one of British cycling’s most iconic records has fallen. And in some style too, loose cleat and all:
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
No Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
Again, two photos of the tyre still banded up fresh out of its packaging. No photo of the tyre fitted and inflated clearly showing the tread and profile.
I don't think the research stands up to the highest levels of scrutiny but the long notjusbikes video about this issue ("these stupid trucks are literally killing us") references some things like companies effectively "marketing towards arseholes" and a version of the common "roadkill experiment" by Mark Rober which had "SUV" drivers as the biggest (fake) animal killers. Now that these things are everywhere * perhaps this effect would be smaller. But perhaps it's not shocking that "less pro-social types" might be more likely to get a big mean car (and drive aggressively) than a 2CV... * What exactly is an "SUV"? Is it more "bigger car" plus the "look"?
@ROOTminus1 Plus 1 from me. I'd also add "LibreWolf" - Firefox fork that is focused on privacy and security. It adds some things like letterboxing to defeat fingerprinting by screen size, deletes most cookies on close by default, has other privacy protection mechanisms.
We need to take different driving tests to be able to operate different (larger/more dangerous vehicles). Should we have a much longer learning period (including requiring cycling on roads so they become aware of the dangers) and tougher test for people who want to drive them?
@MaxiMinimalist If it was to do with a new cycle lane or quiet way, we could easily point to the Evil Cyclist Lobby Inc. But as this is the sweet & innocent auto industry (with the shallowest of pockets & no vested interest) I've absolutely no idea how this could have come to pass..... One of life's great mysteries.
There's an important factor missing, it seems. I suspect the drivers weren't swayed because they didn't believe that it could be them hitting the pedestrian/cyclist. I wonder whether the ad had an impact on whether 'bad' drivers shouldn't have SUVs. No-one believes they are a bad driver, so it's ok for them. Also, there is a factor about feeling safer in a big car - protecting them from those aforementioned bad drivers.
@Rendel Harris maybe we should stop referring to certain cars as SUVs and go back to 'W**kpanzers' and 'Chelsea Tractors' but then going back to your info that wouldn't include the Ford Ranger (although that's a pick-up truck not SUV)
Thanks for the calculations. And as you point out, the difference in the change of velocity (aka acceleration, which is what matters) experienced by the hapless pedestrian is minimal. I don't understand the popular fixation with "energy absorbed" or "energy transferred" which seems to seize the imagination in these scenarios - notwithstanding the fact, as you point out, that most of the KE of the impacting vehicle is not in any case transferred.
@kinderje Well, I'm not very well versed in automobiles but looking at the Tucson that looks like one of the less offending vehicles, not that different to an estate car; that's very different to the rib cage or higher height square bonnets of a Range Rover and a world away from obscene shoulder height bonnet of a Ford Ranger*. If (as I believe there should be) a limit was set on bonnet heights I think your Tucson would be just about acceptable; anything that hits an average size person at the hip or lower so that they go over the bonnet instead of under the wheels should be the aim, in my opinion. Part of the problem is with manufacture nomenclature, because SUVs are seen by many people as the thing to have they call a lot of things that, as above, we used to call estate cars SUVs now. *According to t'intenet the leading top edge of a Tucson's bonnet is around 85 cm from the ground, whereas a Range Rover is 108 cm, doesn't sound like much but the difference in a collision with a pedestrian or cyclist could be huge. I can't find the figure for a Ford Ranger but I am 6 foot tall and when I stood next to one recently the top of the bonnet was about level with my armpit, so I would guess about 140 cm high which makes it a killing machine.
@Rendel Harris Sorry, I normally agree with much of what you say but not on this. I think we have disagreed on cars before. I own a Hyundai Tucson which, although classed as an SUV, I wouldn't say is a prestige vehicle and every school holiday/half term we drive from Somerset to Liverpool or Kent (not for cello lessons!!!) As a cyclist as well, I drive carefully around town but would hate to do 200+ mile journeys in a smaller car on a regular basis. As much as I hate "all cyclists do xyz" it annoys me when I then hear "all SUV drivers are a bunch of???"