Jens Voigt goes weird

LangerDan

I don't like them, but not because I believe that they're some panacea for boring racing. I just don't like the idea of real-time, external influences on race tactics. I was watching a clip of Stephen Roche's attack to win the '87 Worlds. If you recall, he attacked up the left-hand side of the group, against the railings, while the others were watching to their right. All this was done in full view of the following TV camera. If that happened today (quite apart from the fact that Stephen probably wouldn't fit down the gap next to the railings) the outcome would have been entirely different, All it would have taken is a rivals DS, watching the attack live on TV, to warn his rider via radio of a rider on the left. Result - attack neutralised, and a different result. If a rider is more tactically aware, why should that skill be negated? Would you penalise a physically stronger rider because his opposition is weaker?

Alternatively, let them have race radios, but take the TVs out of the following cars. The external decision process will be slowed down sufficiently for it to have less of an impact, but all the other benefits would still be available.

ms_tree

If Jens thinks someone might die in an accident without a radio he should remember Andre Kiviliv who died after he felll while adjusting his radio.

jerry3571

I have heard about safety Measures being put in place (like crash helmets used by the general public) where it is said that people, who ride with helmets, ride with greater abandon than if they didnt have Helmets.
I have also had a car driver argue that his top of the range car can stop on a 6 pence and has extremely good handling so why did I show my disapproval when he hacked round the bend towards me doing 70+mph? My response was to say that I wasn't worried about the car, I was worried about him.
On a safety angle the Radio Safety Debate is a complicated thing-
If a warning is put out that the road narrows at 1km up the road, the riders, should, in theory, all slow. The trouble is that all the top riders will then try to get to the front of the Peleton trying to stay out of trouble and so causing a lot of movement in the group which can lead to crashes.
Also, a single rider may think that it is a good oppurtunity to attack and would want to take advantage of a slowing Peleton and so causing more problems on a dangerous section of road.
Another example- Would a Peleton, with Radios, go through twisting roads faster when there are no reports of incidents or problems than a Peleton without Radios? Are riders more cautious without Radios?
The only answer on the Radio's Safety Issue is statistics, otherwise it is all a bit like guesswork. It's not the technology that is the problem, it is how people deal with that technology and how they use it which is the outstanding issue.

I do remember watching races when the major players didn't notice a big cheese had gone up the road and suddenly there was panic. Always enjoyed that bit of racing which now has gone.

tailwindhome

mroli wrote:

Jens is a cool guy, but I think sorting out LIbya is probably beyond him...

You take that back.

tailwindhome

avoidingmyphd wrote:

pedro118118 wrote:

Where is the evidence [about the thing I disagree with]

I think it's fair to assume [the thing I think]

hmm

The internet in a nutshell

pedro118118

TailWindHome wrote:

avoidingmyphd wrote:

pedro118118 wrote:

Where is the evidence [about the thing I disagree with]

I think it's fair to assume [the thing I think]

hmm

The internet in a nutshell

That's me told...

rick_chasey

I don't think removing radios helps the racing per say.

I think it rewards smarter and more alert riders.

With no radios it's more important to have better positioning in the front group.

Yesterday in Kuurne, when the peloton split in two - the QS guys had to send a team-mate to the back of the 1st peloton to see how far back the 2nd peloton was, to see whether it was worth the effort of drilling it at the front > that kind of thing takes initiative, and benefits teams and riders who are better organised (and have more riders in the mix).

It's not better racing, it rewards smarter racing.

Tom Butcher

Ms Tree wrote:

If Jens thinks someone might die in an accident without a radio he should remember Andre Kiviliv who died after he felll while adjusting his radio.

Exactly. Not just the adjusting them that is potentially dangerous either - there is evidence that hands free phones are dangerous to use while driving so it seems likely that there is the potential for them to distract riders and cause crashes in bike racing. It may not be proven but it seems more likely than Jens' safety argument.

As for the poster who referred to a mythical golden age of racing that proponents of a radio ban are looking to bring back. I think that argument is attacking a bit of a straw man. A radio ban doesn't have to revolutionise tactics or bring back lone breakaways across a series of mountains to be worth introducing. If it just makes a subtle difference to the racing - making it slightly more unpredictable - then unless there is some safety reason why not then it's worth doing. I agree that other things such as heart monitors and power meters can also make a difference - that's not a reason to allow radios just a reason to also ban power meters and anything else that takes away from the essence of racing - riders on bikes with as little external influence on the racing as possible.