TDF unwritten rules etc - I dont get it

Thelittlesthobo

As a newcomer to road cycling and paying a little more interest to the TDF i am a little puzzled by some of the news and comments i am reading about TDF.

1) complaining about there not being a 'Patron' of the Peleton anymore
2) complaining about riders trying harder when there has been a crash to open up gaps
3) generally agreeing things about sprints etc and frowning on anyone who trys to race for themselves without considering the rest.

As far as i can see its a race. Surely its not the place for gentlemens agreements and being 'nice'

Can someone please explain some of these unwritten rules to someone lacking the required decorum

LeicesterLad

Its just the way it is, always has been, its seen as 'sporting' - a bit like passing the ball back to the opposition after an injury, its not a rule, its just the decent thing to do. As for riding for yourself, what many new cycling viewers are surprised by is that professional cycling is in fact a team sport, each member of the team has a certain role within the team, and that is why they are chosen for the team, they all specialise in something.

Pross

In basic terms it has historically been accepted that you don't take advantage of another riders misfortune and in particular those of riders who are in with a shout at the overall or the current wearer of the yellow jersey. It is needed to some extent as otherwise you will get to the stage where people attack and feed zones or when riders are answering a call of nature but it does still amuse me when riders go on about such sporting gestures and half of them are then doped to the eyeballs in an attempt to cheat their way to a win!

iainf72

1) A Patron (or boss) acts as a figurehead for the peloton and keeps things in check. So when everyone is shredded they may keep things calm, or stop people acting like tools. Without one, things tend to be a bit more chaotic and it's harder for the riders

2) In most circumstances it's poor form to take advantage of a crash or mechanical. But this is usually reserved for when nothing is happening. If you hit the deck or decide to pee 20km from the finish, you're on your own

3) Do you mean in breaks etc? If so, then yes, you'll let someone else take the sprint in return for a bigger reward for yourself.

LeicesterLad

Pross wrote:

In basic terms it has historically been accepted that you don't take advantage of another riders misfortune and in particular those of riders who are in with a shout at the overall or the current wearer of the yellow jersey. It is needed to some extent as otherwise you will get to the stage where people attack and feed zones or when riders are answering a call of nature but it does still amuse me when riders go on about such sporting gestures and half of them are then doped to the eyeballs in an attempt to cheat their way to a win!

+1 for the doping thing.

Thelittlesthobo

I do buy into the team aspect of cycling. You need the peleton and your own team. But surely if you are handed an advantage through no fault of your own then as a proff sportsman you should take it with both hands.

LeicesterLad

Thelittlesthobo wrote:

I do buy into the team aspect of cycling. You need the peloton and your own team. But surely if you are handed an advantage through no fault of your own then as a proff sportsman you should take it with both hands.

it would depend on the circumstances i suppose, how the advantage came about. An example of this is G losing 3 minutes in the GC hanging around for Wiggo when he broke his collarbone, felt quite sorry for G, but thats just team life. But then thomas wasn't in the tour to rank highly in the GC, his reason for being there was to look after Wiggo.

Thelittlesthobo

So if a guy needs a pee then its unsporting for a competitor to take advantage of this. I really cant understand this.

If a guy is in with a shout he rides with a cast iron guarentee that should he fall off or puncture or need a pee, the other competitors wont take advantage?

Regarding the patron. So he calms things down. WHo is this person who has the right to 'calm things down'. Its a race! I dont even race but i have competed at sport for years and i have never considered the opposition for 1 second other than how to beat them.

Taking a bigger reward. Are you saying one guy takes the sprint, then if he has a chance of winning the race he backs off!!! Thats madness and cheating imo

Amazed at this undercurrent of what feels like cheating

rick_chasey

Because the physics of cycling dictate that it's much less effort riding behind someone, there's a matrix of complex relationships and deals that are constantly being struck, either explicitly or implicitly.

Riders from rival teams in breakaway agree to work together, etc etc.

As such, favours, being seen to be fair and even, treating the less fortunate the way you would like to be treated if you suffer misfortune is vital.

If the peloton decide they don't want you to win, I can guarantee, time trials aside, that you will not win.

iainf72

In cycling, unlike most other sports, you quite often need "friends" to win.

That's why these things are important. If everyone hates you, you will struggle.

Thelittlesthobo

Oh and trying to understand so please dont take this as cheap jibes at road racing. I clearly have a lot to understand

jibberjim

Thelittlesthobo wrote:

2) complaining about riders trying harder when there has been a crash to open up gaps

The main reason for this - like most of the rules is about safety - it actually becomes more dangerous if it's even more important that you're at the front to avoid a crash, as then everyone will fight tooth and nail to be up there and cause more accidents. By making it that you won't get attacked for innocent crashes early in the stage etc. it reduces the chance.

And that's in everyone's interest.

afx237vi

Why make things difficult for yourself by attacking your rival when he's peeing? You're going to need to take a pee at some point in the race too.

It's not like a game of tennis where you only have one opponent. If you act like a dick in a bike race, you have nearly 200 opponents waiting to put you back in your place.

LeicesterLad

iainf72 wrote:

In cycling, unlike most other sports, you quite often need "friends" to win.

That's why these things are important. If everyone hates you, you will struggle.

Summed up perfectly. In all a 'Solo' win, is very rarely a solo win.

Monty Dog

There's a big difference by today's interpretation of 'Le Patron' and the one of yesteryear. The likes of Bernard Hinault earned his reputation through his fearsome racing style and preparedness to take no truck from no-one, be it other riders or people blocking the race! In contrast, people like Cancellara sitting-up and trying to control the race because his team mates are incompetent bike-handlers is another thing entirely. The 'unwritten rules' seem to be open to interpretation by some, particularly if they see it being unfavourable to them, be it Frank Schlecks inability to change gear or descent in the wet. It's all part of the rough and tumble of bike racing - when people raced for 200 days a year, one race result was less critical - with riders now racing less than 50 days and focusing on so few races, they seem to believe they should be given some special entitlement and consideration? No one rider deserves special priviledges over another IMO, and if they cant hack it, we tough - it's like life, suck it up and move on.

LeicesterLad

Monty Dog wrote:

There's a big difference by today's interpretation of 'Le Patron' and the one of yesteryear. The likes of Bernard Hinault earned his reputation through his fearsome racing style and preparedness to take no truck from no-one, be it other riders or people blocking the race! In contrast, people like Cancellara sitting-up and trying to control the race because his team mates are incompetent bike-handlers is another thing entirely. The 'unwritten rules' seem to be open to interpretation by some, particularly if they see it being unfavourable to them, be it Frank Schlecks inability to change gear or descent in the wet. It's all part of the rough and tumble of bike racing - when people raced for 200 days a year, one race result was less critical - with riders now racing less than 50 days and focusing on so few races, they seem to believe they should be given some special entitlement and consideration? No one rider deserves special priviledges over another IMO, and if they cant hack it, we tough - it's like life, suck it up and move on.

+1 also a fair statement, sometimes the unwritten rulse do seem ludicrous in certain situations, and like has been said, it wouldn't happen in any other sport.

bompington

Monty Dog wrote:

There's a big difference by today's interpretation of 'Le Patron' and the one of yesteryear. The likes of Bernard Hinault earned his reputation through his fearsome racing style and preparedness to take no truck from no-one, be it other riders or people blocking the race! In contrast, people like Cancellara sitting-up and trying to control the race because his team mates are incompetent bike-handlers is another thing entirely. The 'unwritten rules' seem to be open to interpretation by some, particularly if they see it being unfavourable to them, be it Frank Schlecks inability to change gear or descent in the wet. It's all part of the rough and tumble of bike racing - when people raced for 200 days a year, one race result was less critical - with riders now racing less than 50 days and focusing on so few races, they seem to believe they should be given some special entitlement and consideration? No one rider deserves special priviledges over another IMO, and if they cant hack it, we tough - it's like life, suck it up and move on.

Yeah, bunch of slow, incompetent jessies, the lot of them, I bet you could show them a thing or two, eh?

Monty Dog

bompington wrote:

[Yeah, bunch of slow, incompetent jessies, the lot of them, I bet you could show them a thing or two, eh?

All that post does is demonstrate your lack of knowledge about the sport - I was trying to contract the traditonal understanding of the 'patron' like Merckx, Hinault and even Kelly in contrast to the molly-coddled pros of today - the fact that you use it as an attempt to slight another poster says lots about you.

Thelittlesthobo

thanks for the replies guys. Dont start attacking each other. I know there is a bit of macho pride about these things but it doesnt help get many answers.

So what you are saying is that

in order to win you need the other riders that you are trying to beat.
in order to win you must show these same riders respect or the rest of the teams will intentionally ruin your ride
in order to win you must do as you are told in the peleton or you will be punished by the peleton

From what i am reading i wonder why people bothered drug taking. I mean, wouldnt it be better just to throw a good party and have the rest of the peleton be your best buddies and let you win :-)

Has anyone ever just said 'up yours' to the peleton and had his team ride him to victory. Or is it because no team has ever been strong enough to achieve this?

OffTheBackAdam

1) complaining about there not being a 'Patron' of the peloton anymore

Covered by others, more or less. The Patron would tend to control a few things, letting a rider go up the road to meet family/lead through his home town. Also tended to be the first to face down the organisors, if they were thought to be too demanding, like the old days of split stages. I too thought that Cancellara should've been told "Tough" by the rest of the peleton, who could handle their bikes!
2) complaining about riders trying harder when there has been a crash to open up gaps
This one seems to be dying, cf Contador's attack on Shleck last year.
It's a sign of sortsmanship, perhaps if the OP disagrees, football's a more suitable sport, with diving, handballs, jersey tugging & the like?
3) generally agreeing things about sprints etc and frowning on anyone who trys to race for themselves without considering the rest.
It's more a case of the non-sprinters or their teams, getting mixed up in a full-on sprint. The bike-handling of the sprinters & their lead-out trains is second to non, the risks taken are calculated, they trust the others in their position to be capable of staying upright, the non-specialists' handling skills aren't up to it. A crash during a sprint's bad news and likely to cause a lot of injuries.

rick_chasey

Thelittlesthobo wrote:

Has anyone ever just said 'up yours' to the peloton and had his team ride him to victory. Or is it because no team has ever been strong enough to achieve this?

If someone is strong enough as a rider that they can almost hurt anyone in the peloton at will, then they get their respect through fear.

It wasn't uncommon for big riders back in the day, like Hinault or Merckx to attack the entire peloton, cause enormous suffering to the peloton to get their own way.

They're very unusual though, and, even though they have that enormous talent, they were also very good at building up relationships and favours.

There's a real classic example in the film overcoming. They're in the CSC car in the Tour, and Rasmussen, riding for Rabobank, is on the attack, ahead of the peloton. He picks up a CSC rider along the way.

The Rabobank car pulls up alongside the CSC car and ask why the CSC rider wasn't sharing the effort with Rasmussen, and instead, was saving his energy by sitting in Rasmussen's wheel. CSC responded by saying because Rasmussen didn't wait for a punctured CSC rider in a breakaway at another race (the Dauphine), there was no reason to help Rasmussen get further up the road now.

graeme_s-2

The constantly shifting nature of allegiances, truces and battles in the peloton is one of the things that I find most fascinating about pro cycling.

You might spend all day working with another rider in a break away and are effectively "friends", but when it comes to the sprint for the line you're suddenly enemies. Or one day your team might be chasing the break to give their sprinter a chance at a stage win, and the yellow jersey's team will be a valuable ally, whereas the following day you might be trying to take the jersey from them.

I can understand that at a glance it can look like collusion, but it really is just a reflection of the physics and team structure of the sport.

Thelittlesthobo

I would be worried i farted in the wrong direction and upset someone :-)

lucybears

Tour of Oman 2010
February 17, Stage 4: Ibri - Nakhal 187km
Boasson Hagen loses lead

Arguments spark attacks

The two climbs in the foothills of the Jabal Akhdar mountains and the hot conditions for the 187km stage were expected to shape the racing but it seems the arguments about race leadership responsibility was the spark that blew the stage apart and ultimately cost Boasson Hagen and Team Sky any chance of overall victory.
According to numerous riders and directeur sportifs Cyclingnews talked to after the stage, events escalated during the stage.
Team Sky riders let a six-rider break gain almost seven minutes in the first hour and then were angry when no other teams were willing to help them chase the break.
Several riders claimed that the Team Sky riders vented their anger on the peloton by blasting through the feed zone and then put the peloton in the gutter by riding a half-road echelon when the wind changed direction.
That especially angered the Cervelo Test Team, who retaliated by splitting the race when Boasson Hagen stopped for a leak 55km from the finish. Because he was race leader, Boasson Hagen had perhaps thought the peloton would wait for him, but in the heat of battle, nobody did and 41 riders group quickly formed an echelon and accelerated up the road.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/1st-to ... -4/results

Roger Hammond justified the Cervélo Test Team's tactic by revealing how Team Sky had ridden earlier in the stage.
"They brought it upon themselves,"
"They can have it one way or the other. Either everyone plays the same game or they play unfairly and then they get unfairly treated."
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/oman-pe ... aggression

luckao

Alberto appears to be good at pacifying others. How many wins did he gift during the Giro, the same race in which some of his compatriots towed him along on a rare occasion he looked a little under pressure.

Conversely, and I comment as somebody who didn't care during those days, somebody like Armstrong appeared to reign through the aforementioned fear. I've heard a few stories, and it isn't like he lacked the team to back it up.

cristoff

most interesting thread on here for ages. Love the story about sky at Oman!

Monty Dog

The big difference between now and then is that you didn't have whole teams 'hopped up' for the GTs which has completely changed the character of races. Modern training methods also mean that the differentials in performance are less between the top and lower team riders

mr_poll

Think it is also a factor that within the Tour there are a number of different "races" going on.

On stage 9 before the whole car crash incident there was talk by the commentators aboout how the 5 man break away would be talking about each of them getting the best result for them. It was some along the lines of:

Everyone leads Hoogerland up the mountains and let him cross the line first, so he scores highly and gets to wear the Polka Dot Jersey

The breakaway works to ensure the group cross the line with such a gap over Thor that Tommy V becomes the Tour Leader and wears the Yellow Jersey.

If these things happen Hoogerland and Tommy V will not contest the sprint and Flecha et al have the chance of a stage victory.

Therefore working together for each others interests means the break has a better chance of bringing success to all (well 3 of 5).


Think I got that right - feel free to correct me if I am wrong.




RE: The sky story - that was very true but in addition there was also the whole undercurrent of Sky waltzing in waving cheque books and perception of Brailsford's comments of bringing the track to the road being arrogant - the peloton saw the refusal to chase as the perfect slap in the face to Team Sky.

Thelittlesthobo

Wow, amazing stories and facts. I still cant get my head around all these agreements and sub plots but i kind of understand the theory. It just doesnt seem to be British to be making agreements about who wins etc. Maybe thats why we never win ;-)

jerry3571

Le Patron-









I think it used to work like this "If you can make my Legs hurt then I'll talk to you"
I think Rominger may have said something like that in the past to some new Pro; suprised me that one.
The Patron is the cycling version of the School "Jock".

-Jerry

PS- Cycling as a whole; as Duffers would say " is wheels within wheels" or "Chess on Wheels". I do miss his daily updates of what wine he cwoffed or Cheese he had with last night's meal.

Duffers-

eh

I seem to remember a story of Cipo going after a rider who'd attacked early in a stage of the Giro to tell them to stop it, as this was the Giro not the TDF, so the first few hours at the Giro should be ridden tempo, not attacking. Can anyone shed light if this is true?

Also remember that all the riders are on the road together for long periods of time, so there is plenty of time to chat, make friendships etc, kinda hard to do that on a football pitch or athletics track.

Oh and for every unwritten rule you can find a historic account of when it was broken. After all wasn't Charly Gaul attacked when he stopped for a toilet break, and that was long, long before the EBH incident.