Creatin only seems to benefit those who are doing very heaving, intense work loads during their training. It doesn't seem to be any help for the lower intensity, endurance type training that most recreational riders undertake.
The only exception might be for vegetarians as natural creatin is normally sourced from red meat. However, as many of the creatin supplements also seem to have some 'provenance' from animal products, it's not an easy issue in these cases.
There is also an issue which makes my recommendations about it's use extremely cautious. It's a product that is heavily used in bodybuilding, which immediately makes me wary. I have a suspicion (and nothing more) that some manufacturers may have 'boosted' the effectiveness of their product with a trace of steroids. You can just imagine peer to peer recommendations that Brand X seems to work 'unbelievably well' and suddenly the whole gym makes the switch. What a great way of marketing it! It might seem unscrupulous, but not inconceivable. My suspicions were also aroused when all the track sprinters caught for using nandrelone all claimed to be heavy users of creatin. Or have I fallen for their smoke screen?
I think a normal eating regime will be more than sufficient for your needs. At 'touring speeds' you should be able to utilise the food eaten during regular meals which together with a degree of 'fat burning' is the classic endurance fuelling regime. However when you get to the hills (mountains!), it's more likely that the increased efforts required will need you to burn your glycogen reserves. As you can only store about 2 hours worth in your blood, regular 'nibbling' will help, along with plenty of fluids. Don't forget that a 50:50 regular coke / water mix is an effective (if messy) fill for your bottles in hot weather.
As for recovery, it again depends on the intensity of the exercise you have done. Its' obviously possible to 'endurance ride' forever (well, 90 hours of PBP seems like forever!) without the need to recover, but as intensity increases, so your body needs more time (and help) to overcome the energy debt it will be in. There seems to be a golden time to do this (of declining efficiency) of up to 2 hours after exercise. The maxim used to be that some protein with the bulk of carbs helped in the assimilation, but there is less certainty over this. However the important bit is that eating and drinking after exercise is important and the sooner you get on and do it the better. 'I'm too tired to eat' or 'all I need is sleep' are unacceptable if you have plans for the following day.
Stretching is more controversial. I know world champions who have never stretched. Ever. Not even to tie their shoe laces. If you enjoy it - do it. If not, there's probably better things to do with your time.
The use of ice packs (baths) is however based entirely on science. Training is based on over extending your physical abilities and then allowing the body to adapt. Setting aside any specific injury, it's inconceivable that hard training will not cause any little tears or other damage to soft tissues which will result in swelling. Swelling constricts the capillaries which results in a decline in the flow of blood, oxygen and food needed by the tissues to recovery. Ice reduces swelling and hence you recover faster. If you have any suspicions that you might have aggravated an old problem or given some part of your body a hard time, wrap a bag of frozen peas in a tea towel and ice it. Or immerse yourself in a wheelie bin of iced water if you're Paula Radcliffe. Obviously, cyclist endure less 'impact' than runners, but localised icing is a useful technique.
