Forum home Road cycling forum Pro race

Is this article wrong? (about Prologue in Tour)

iainf72iainf72 Posts: 15,784
edited October 2007 in Pro race
http://www.bikeradar.com/road/news/arti ... ogue-12954

Didn't they try something odd in 1988 with a crit type of thing on the first day?
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.

Posts

  • SalsicciaSalsiccia Posts: 405
    No, the article is right.

    http://www.letour.fr/2007/TDF/COURSE/us/grand_depart_2008.html

    Full parcours revealed today, I believe.
    I was only joking when I said
    by rights you should be bludgeoned in your bed
  • iainf72iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    The article (original) say

    It will be the first time since 1967 that the prologue, normally held over
    a distance of between five and 10km, will not feature at the start of the
    three-week epic.


    The 88 tour started with a road stage that didnt' count towards the overall - My memory has been numbed by beer over the years.

    http://www.letour.fr/HISTO/TDF/1988/us/ ... 8&x=48&y=4
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • SalsicciaSalsiccia Posts: 405
    Excuse my extreme dullness - I thought you we referring to the accuracy of the report with regard to 2008! :oops:
    I was only joking when I said
    by rights you should be bludgeoned in your bed
  • Yup you're right, according to Cyclingnews it was called a 'preface' in 1988 at La Baule.

    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/oct07/oct25news

    They're saying first time with no Prologue, but hasn't on a couple of occassions the opening stage been a ITT called 'Stage 1' because it was too long to be called a 'Prologue'?
  • Jeff JonesJeff Jones Posts: 1,865 Editor
    Yup you're right, according to Cyclingnews it was called a 'preface' in 1988 at La Baule.

    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/oct07/oct25news

    They're saying first time with no Prologue, but hasn't on a couple of occassions the opening stage been a ITT called 'Stage 1' because it was too long to be called a 'Prologue'?
    I'll amend it to 'opening time trial'. There have been a few occasions in the last 10 years that it's been called stage 1 instead of a prologue, but it's still been a time trial.
    Jeff Jones

    Product manager, Sports
  • iainf72iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    jjones wrote:
    I'll amend it to 'opening time trial'. There have been a few occasions in the last 10 years that it's been called stage 1 instead of a prologue, but it's still been a time trial.

    And the Preface wasn't a TT either, was it?
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • The Preface in 1988 was a team time trial, followed by a flying individual time trial. Teams weren't obliged to participate, but as it would dictate the order of the team time trial the next day (?), every team gave it a go.

    There was a team time trial in 1971, instead of a prologue, as well, according to the Cycling Weekly website.

    http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/Tou ... 51228.html
  • iainf72iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    The Preface in 1988 was a team time trial, followed by a flying individual time trial. Teams weren't obliged to participate, but as it would dictate the order of the team time trial the next day (?), every team gave it a go.

    There was a team time trial in 1971, instead of a prologue, as well, according to the Cycling Weekly website.

    http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/Tou ... 51228.html

    Cool, thanks! I knew the preface was something wierd but I couldn't remember.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • Jeff JonesJeff Jones Posts: 1,865 Editor
    iainf72 wrote:
    jjones wrote:
    I'll amend it to 'opening time trial'. There have been a few occasions in the last 10 years that it's been called stage 1 instead of a prologue, but it's still been a time trial.

    And the Preface wasn't a TT either, was it?
    No, but it didn't count towards the overall so it's not really part of the race.
    Jeff Jones

    Product manager, Sports
  • LangerDanLangerDan Posts: 6,132
    IIRC, the original reason for a prologue was that the UCI regs at the time limited GTs to 21 days. A prologue - which HAS to be a time trial - was added to allow the yellow jersey to be awarded, as well as keeping paying punters busy for both days of the the Grand Depart week-end. In addition, while the prologue counts towards GC, I think that if you fail to finish a prologue you can start the next day.

    GTs are now allowed to be up to 23 days long so they can run what they like on the Saturday, as long as its not called a prologue

    My suspicion is that by having a road stage to begin with, ASO are avoiding much potential unpleasantness with having to seed the top riders for the prologue, particularly if there turns out to be unresolved disciplinary issues.
    'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'
  • In 88 the first official day of the Tour was a Monday - there was no Grand Depart weekend as we know it today.

    The bizarre preface was held on the Sunday afternoon. The teams set off in the usual team time trial style and rode about 4k then, under the kilometre kite, one rider carried on alone and was timed only over that final kilometre. Bontempi won it and wore the yellow jersey in the opening stage proper.

    So it didn't count for the overall times but to say it wasn't part of the race is not really correct. It was a technicality to get around the fact the UCI had made a stupid rule saying all races had to be done and dusted inside three weeks.
  • Jeff JonesJeff Jones Posts: 1,865 Editor
    In 88 the first official day of the Tour was a Monday - there was no Grand Depart weekend as we know it today.

    The bizarre preface was held on the Sunday afternoon. The teams set off in the usual team time trial style and rode about 4k then, under the kilometre kite, one rider carried on alone and was timed only over that final kilometre. Bontempi won it and wore the yellow jersey in the opening stage proper.

    So it didn't count for the overall times but to say it wasn't part of the race is not really correct. It was a technicality to get around the fact the UCI had made a stupid rule saying all races had to be done and dusted inside three weeks.
    Fair enough (rule number one: check facts). So it was part of the race but it was also a time trial. Thus the amended 'first time without an opening time trial since 1967' is correct :)
    Jeff Jones

    Product manager, Sports
  • Well no, it's not correct but because cyclingnews has said it, it must be true eh?!

    It's actually the first time since 1966.

    In 1967 there was a prologue - the first one - won by some Spaniard.

    The last time there was not a time trial of any sort to kick off the race was in 1966. Won by Rudi Altig according to the comic's site, but I haven't double-checked that on the Tour's site.
  • BigSpecsBigSpecs Posts: 309
    I think this is just a deliberate ploy by Iain to have me clocking off from work early to go home and scramble about for my 1988 highlights video! :D
Sign In or Register to comment.