If you were in charge...
Comments
-
The problem with it is that is just denies riders food and water, which serves no purpose what so ever. The rule is there to stop 'sticky bottles' in the end portions of the race and to stop cars driving up to the peloton at the end (which they used to do pre-radios). But that isn't something that is currently happening. The current rule serves its purpose.gpreeves wrote:ugo.santalucia wrote:RichN95 wrote:
Amongst some pretty dumb suggestions, this is the most moronic so far.ugo.santalucia wrote:If a rider gets a bottle where he is not supposed to, he gets disqualified, not penalised by a handful of seconds.
... or you could also re-word it as... :?:
My worry with this suggestion would be to do with the safety of the riders.
If the past 20 years has taught us anything, it's that the riders will take risks with their health if it improves their chances of winning. You don't want to possibly (even if the chance is very small) risk creating a situation where a dehydrated rider chooses to carry on without water for the sake of not getting disqualified.
It's a draconian solution to a problem that doesn't exist, born out of some slavish adherence to the rules without understanding why the rule is there is the first place and a fundemental distain for cyclists.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:It's a draconian solution to a problem that doesn't exist, born out of some slavish adherence to the rules without understanding why the rule is there is the first place and a fundemental distain for cyclists.
My point is the excessive reliance riders have to admiral cars. Spectators, who ultimately are those who pay riders salaries, want to see more action, more happening, which is currently denied, as riders are radio-guided by admiral cars and have access to everything they need at any time of the race (mechanical assistance, food, drinks, a push here and there, a new bike, information... ). Races where there is less contact between admiral car and rider (take Paris-Roubaix and Flanders for instance) are the ones where more things happenleft the forum March 20230 -
And that has absolutely nothing to do with whether a rider can have water if he needs it.ugo.santalucia wrote:My point is the excessive reliance riders have to admiral cars. Spectators, who ultimately are those who pay riders salaries, want to see more action, more happening, which is currently denied, as riders are radio-guided by admiral cars and have access to everything they need at any time of the race (mechanical assistance, food, drinks, a push here and there, a new bike, information... ). Races where there is less contact between admiral car and rider (take Paris-Roubaix and Flanders for instance) are the ones where more things happen
Your problem is that you think that if the radios are taken away then all the riders will suddenly turn into clueless imbeciles who can't think for themselves. This isn't the case at all.
And there is probably more radio contact in races like Roubaix and Flanders than a Tour stage.
Sky don't ride the way they do in the Tour because someone on the radio has told them to, it's because they have been training to ride like that for the past six months. They will ride like that, radio or no radio.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Ugo if you are a fan of photos with snow then look no further than this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/smashred/s ... 773839310/
Contador is the Greatest0 -
I like the idea of black shorts but thinking about it I doubt it would work with the modern jerseys - too much of a clash. Helmets optional on summit finishes (wow for photos) but mandatory everywhere else. Only issue is that many times the riders have to come back down some of the mountain to reach their buses.
Lots of interesting and good suggestions on here - someone should send the link to Cookson ; )
Ugo, I like and understand your sentiment, but I think it needs to be tempered with some realism as well.
Contador is the Greatest0 -
It's a hard one, in the old days the riders weren't allowed any outside help but I'm sure still received wine/water from the roadside. Now thankfully they don't have to go to a blacksmith to mend their forks...
Someone might be able to clarify a bit further on this one but was the Chris Froome thing not because he was in the closing stages of the race? I would imagine this would be more to do with the logistics of getting cars to the race leaders near the end, they are allowed to get bottles at other points of the race.
There is a safety element on some of the very hot days, if a guy needs some fluids he needs some fluids. Why not have a neutral service bike like the camelback one we saw in one of the tours for the hot mountain top finishes? It's a motorbike so much easier to get through the riders and then everyone has the same access to water.0 -
frenchfighter wrote:Ugo if you are a fan of photos with snow then look no further than this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/smashred/s ... 773839310/
Good man Pellizotti, redeeming himself in the snow!
BTW: they can wear winter jackets if they want to... if they choose not to, I have very little sympathy for them being cold... MSR is another example of riders inadequately dressed for the conditions.left the forum March 20230 -
They MUST match the team kit though, that was hard work when they just had generic coloured jackets onugo.santalucia wrote:frenchfighter wrote:Ugo if you are a fan of photos with snow then look no further than this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/smashred/s ... 773839310/
Good man Pellizotti, redeeming himself in the snow!
BTW: they can wear winter jackets if they want to... if they choose not to, I have very little sympathy for them being cold... MSR is another example of riders inadequately dressed for the conditions.0 -
RichN95 wrote:Sky don't ride the way they do in the Tour because someone on the radio has told them to, it's because they have been training to ride like that for the past six months. They will ride like that, radio or no radio.
Sky is now and US Postal was before... they ride that way because the technology allows it, when the technology did not allow, they did not ride like that.
Didn't it all start with Motorola and mobile phones? Am I talking rubbish? I definitely remember in the 90s the outrage in Italy at Cipollini communicating to the admiral with a mobile phoneleft the forum March 20230 -
No. They ride that way because, if you have a strong enough team, it is the best tactic. Riding at a steady but slowly increasing pace is the most efficient and effective way to get from the bottom of a mountain to the top in the quickest time. That's why riders ride time trials like that and not in spurts of acceleration.ugo.santalucia wrote:RichN95 wrote:Sky don't ride the way they do in the Tour because someone on the radio has told them to, it's because they have been training to ride like that for the past six months. They will ride like that, radio or no radio.
Sky is now and US Postal was before... they ride that way because the technology allows it, when the technology did not allow, they did not ride like that.
Take the radios off them and they will ride in exactly the same way.
Do you watch football? If you do you will see the manager at the side of the pitch shouting orders. Now if that manager gets sent to the stands by the referee, do they players a) keep playing in exactly the same way as before or b) run around all chasing the ball like primary schoolboys in the playground with no idea of tactics?Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:No. They ride that way because, if you have a strong enough team, it is the best tactic. Riding at a steady but slowly increasing pace is the most efficient and effective way to get from the bottom of a mountain to the top in the quickest time. That's why riders ride time trials like that and not in spurts of acceleration.
I have no objection with the way they tackle a climb... if you have strong domestiques, you should do just that... Indurain was doing just that... it's the way they control the race, which can only be done by knowing everything it is happening at the front and at the back. It's the way the top man can control his effort with a monitor to avoid bonking...
C'mon, you must admit they don't bonk anymore... when they do, they lose 30 seconds, in the past they did seriously crack up those climbs... I do believe a monitor telling you what's going on in your body helps preventing that... and spoils the fun
But hey, I might be wrong... the fact is that I no longer enjoy watching the Tour, while I still enjoy watching the classics and to an extent the Giro... the difference is the way the race is "controlled" by 1-2 teamsleft the forum March 20230 -
RichN95 wrote:
No. They ride that way because, if you have a strong enough team, it is the best tactic. Riding at a steady but slowly increasing pace is the most efficient and effective way to get from the bottom of a mountain to the top in the quickest time. That's why riders ride time trials like that and not in spurts of acceleration.ugo.santalucia wrote:RichN95 wrote:Sky don't ride the way they do in the Tour because someone on the radio has told them to, it's because they have been training to ride like that for the past six months. They will ride like that, radio or no radio.
Sky is now and US Postal was before... they ride that way because the technology allows it, when the technology did not allow, they did not ride like that.
Take the radios off them and they will ride in exactly the same way.
Do you watch football? If you do you will see the manager at the side of the pitch shouting orders. Now if that manager gets sent to the stands by the referee, do they players a) keep playing in exactly the same way as before or b) run around all chasing the ball like primary schoolboys in the playground with no idea of tactics?
Perfectly put, people seem to forget that cycling teams are in the business to win, not entertain. Sky ride like that because they are very strong and they can, Movistar tried it twice at the tour (once when Froome had no-one left and the cross winds day) and didn't really have any effect because they weren't strong enough.
If you want to watch a sport where the main goal of the person participating is to entertain you, I'm sure the WWE would like some new fans.0 -
No monitors . Lets just race.
There is nothing stopping another rider jumping on the back of the Sky train. Many have tried and most have failed.
It seems it's only Froome who can kick at the end.
Quintana had the right idea.
Burst's of speed and more than one GC contender attacking at a time
I think the Contador that dominated the Giro would give Sky a clean pair of heels. Alas I think those performances are now beyond him.0 -
Very true rayjay, Movistar have looked the best at upsetting Sky (and other teams), they seem to constantly have someone trying to change the pace, shelling Sky train in the process.0
-
sjmclean wrote:RichN95 wrote:
No. They ride that way because, if you have a strong enough team, it is the best tactic. Riding at a steady but slowly increasing pace is the most efficient and effective way to get from the bottom of a mountain to the top in the quickest time. That's why riders ride time trials like that and not in spurts of acceleration.ugo.santalucia wrote:RichN95 wrote:Sky don't ride the way they do in the Tour because someone on the radio has told them to, it's because they have been training to ride like that for the past six months. They will ride like that, radio or no radio.
Sky is now and US Postal was before... they ride that way because the technology allows it, when the technology did not allow, they did not ride like that.
Take the radios off them and they will ride in exactly the same way.
Do you watch football? If you do you will see the manager at the side of the pitch shouting orders. Now if that manager gets sent to the stands by the referee, do they players a) keep playing in exactly the same way as before or b) run around all chasing the ball like primary schoolboys in the playground with no idea of tactics?
Perfectly put, people seem to forget that cycling teams are in the business to win, not entertain. Sky ride like that because they are very strong and they can, Movistar tried it twice at the tour (once when Froome had no-one left and the cross winds day) and didn't really have any effect because they weren't strong enough.
If you want to watch a sport where the main goal of the person participating is to entertain you, I'm sure the WWE would like some new fans.
Exactly. But suggesting that a team of guys killing themselves for there team leader, on a climb, and daring the specialist climbers to go faster, is not entertaining, is purely down to personal opinion.0 -
RichN95 wrote:Do you watch football? If you do you will see the manager at the side of the pitch shouting orders. Now if that manager gets sent to the stands by the referee, do they players a) keep playing in exactly the same way as before or b) run around all chasing the ball like primary schoolboys in the playground with no idea of tactics?
That argument is slightly paradoxical - why is the manager shouting at them in the first place, if they will continue to play whether he shouts or not?* The reality is that he is trying to improve things and make marginal gains. The same is true of modern technology on bikes too. Banning it would make a difference in the same way as banning a manager at a football match, the pertinent question is how much of a difference it would make. On this point, there is clearly some debate.
*I'm assuming said manager has a brain.0 -
TheBigBean wrote:RichN95 wrote:Do you watch football? If you do you will see the manager at the side of the pitch shouting orders. Now if that manager gets sent to the stands by the referee, do they players a) keep playing in exactly the same way as before or b) run around all chasing the ball like primary schoolboys in the playground with no idea of tactics?
That argument is slightly paradoxical - why is the manager shouting at them in the first place, if they will continue to play whether he shouts or not?* The reality is that he is trying to improve things and make marginal gains. The same is true of modern technology on bikes too. Banning it would make a difference in the same way as banning a manager at a football match, the pertinent question is how much of a difference it would make. On this point, there is clearly some debate.
*I'm assuming said manager has a brain.
Or indeed a voice that can be heard 50 meters away over a 40.000 plus crowd. Not likely.0 -
But they are only making small changes though. The team still plays in generally the same manner. They don't change their entire style of play.TheBigBean wrote:That argument is slightly paradoxical - why is the manager shouting at them in the first place, if they will continue to play whether he shouts or not?* The reality is that he is trying to improve things and make marginal gains.
Most of the time though, I suspect they are just stating the bleeding obvious just for the sake of it to seem involved - much like a DS on a radio.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:Most of the time though, I suspect they are just stating the bleeding obvious just for the sake of it to seem involved - much like a DS on a radio.
Not really... I suppose you have seen the documentary "Overcoming"... there is a scene where you see Riis talking at the phone with Bruyneel and then communicating with his team to collaborate with US Postal to break the peloton on a windy exposed section. That's not possible without radios... incidentally that helped creating a bit of drama, other times, I'd say most times, it helps flattening the race.left the forum March 20230 -
So it would be impossible to two riders on those teams to do that for themselves, would it? I suppose there were never echelons before radios. In the HTC documentary a few years later it was clearly Mick Rogers organising affairs to create an echelon (probably was this year too). And before radios did teams never co-operate?ugo.santalucia wrote:RichN95 wrote:Most of the time though, I suspect they are just stating the bleeding obvious just for the sake of it to seem involved - much like a DS on a radio.
Not really... I suppose you have seen the documentary "Overcoming"... there is a scene where you see Riis talking at the phone with Bruyneel and then communicating with his team to collaborate with US Postal to break the peloton on a windy exposed section. That's not possible without radios... incidentally that helped creating a bit of drama, other times, I'd say most times, it helps flattening the race.
Do you also realize that TV pictures are a few seconds behind the actual action (and also cut between cameras a lot). A DS isn't the person best positioned to make decisions.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
So it would be impossible to two riders on those teams to do that for themselves, would it? I suppose there were never echelons before radios. In the HTC documentary a few years later it was clearly Mick Rogers organising affairs to create an echelon (probably was this year too). And before radios did teams never co-operate?ugo.santalucia wrote:RichN95 wrote:Most of the time though, I suspect they are just stating the bleeding obvious just for the sake of it to seem involved - much like a DS on a radio.
Not really... I suppose you have seen the documentary "Overcoming"... there is a scene where you see Riis talking at the phone with Bruyneel and then communicating with his team to collaborate with US Postal to break the peloton on a windy exposed section. That's not possible without radios... incidentally that helped creating a bit of drama, other times, I'd say most times, it helps flattening the race.
Do you also realize that TV pictures are a few seconds behind the actual action (and also cut between cameras a lot). A DS isn't the person best positioned to make decisions.
The GCN video on team cars and the article in this months Procyclling with the neutral support car says there is about an 8 second delay for the tv coverage.0 -
RichN95 wrote:
No. They ride that way because, if you have a strong enough team, it is the best tactic. Riding at a steady but slowly increasing pace is the most efficient and effective way to get from the bottom of a mountain to the top in the quickest time. That's why riders ride time trials like that and not in spurts of acceleration.ugo.santalucia wrote:RichN95 wrote:Sky don't ride the way they do in the Tour because someone on the radio has told them to, it's because they have been training to ride like that for the past six months. They will ride like that, radio or no radio.
Sky is now and US Postal was before... they ride that way because the technology allows it, when the technology did not allow, they did not ride like that.
Take the radios off them and they will ride in exactly the same way.
Do you watch football? If you do you will see the manager at the side of the pitch shouting orders. Now if that manager gets sent to the stands by the referee, do they players a) keep playing in exactly the same way as before or b) run around all chasing the ball like primary schoolboys in the playground with no idea of tactics?
An excellent analogy if your intention was to prove Ugo's point. In football a team has to respond to events - of course a manager can send a team out to play a certain way but that isn't fixed for 90 minutes regardless.
Similarly in cycling the best laid plans can be derailed by events - the loss of key domestiques, a leader in trouble, an unexpected attack by opponents - this is where communication with the DS often restores order over chaos - where chaos almost always makes for a better race.
Radios and power meters do help control races - radios more so but teams do use power meters to measure effort during races.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0 -
RichN95 wrote:So it would be impossible to two riders on those teams to do that for themselves, would it? I suppose there were never echelons before radios. In the HTC documentary a few years later it was clearly Mick Rogers organising affairs to create an echelon (probably was this year too). And before radios did teams never co-operate?
It would be riders decision and not team car tactics... I would prefer. If the rider doesn't know it's raining down the Galibier, maybe he attacks on the climb, but if he does, then the team car will tell him not to bother, stay safe in the group...
I suppose I am making it bigger than it really is... but the impression riders are radio guided is real and frankly annoying... when I see someone 5 minutes ahead talking to the radio and slowing down to wait for his captain it annoys me... it's not fair for him, it's not good for the fansleft the forum March 20230 -
So you'd prefer the DS driving up along side and saying it then?
.....as happened to LeMond the year before the "super amazing most bestest tour of awesomeness ever" And apparently the yardstick against which all races must be judged into perpetuityWe're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
People who say lack of radios don't affect race tactics obviously haven't been watching the non-world tour one day races.
It's a definite difference. Van Avermaert for example often came in sticky situations, ending up in groups ahead of Gilbert, not knowing if he should race or not. Similar with the QS boys for Tom Boonen. In that instance (E3 i believe) the QS riders were in a good position up front but made a decision soon after the Oude Kwaremont ( I think) to wait for Tom - who was already basically accepting defeat.
Peeters got some stick for it until he reminded the journos he had no control over it.
Now you can argue if this is better or worse for racing, but it definitely changes racing.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:People who say lack of radios don't affect race tactics obviously haven't been watching the non-world tour one day races.
It's a definite difference. Van Avermaert for example often came in sticky situations, ending up in groups ahead of Gilbert, not knowing if he should race or not. Similar with the QS boys for Tom Boonen. In that instance (E3 i believe) the QS riders were in a good position up front but made a decision soon after the Oude Kwaremont ( I think) to wait for Tom - who was already basically accepting defeat.
Peeters got some stick for it until he reminded the journos he had no control over it.
Now you can argue if this is better or worse for racing, but it definitely changes racing.
Thank you!left the forum March 20230 -
madasahattersley wrote:Another aye in favour of banning race radios.
In fact I'd go the whole hog and ban all power meters as well. Attacks on climbs will eventually die out as almost all riders accept the fruitlessness of being out front for 5 minutes before the domestique on the front of the bunch (with a very deep understanding of how power and fatigue resistance work) steadily paces the bunch back onto his wheel before storming past him.
Some say that people don't attack because when the likes of Sky are at the front the pace is too high and riders physically can't attack but that's nonsense really. A short burst at 600w and you'll have a gap, but these days all of the riders know that having a gap on a climb means nothing when the dominant team knows exactly how hard they have to work to gradually peg you back.
Maybe if there were no power meters then it would be more unknown, the long markers, brave chancers might have a better chance, and some real proper nitty gritty racing could happen. You can't blame them for using power meters - they help the team get the results and that's what matters - but maybe for the good of the sport as a whole (attracting more viewers and excitement and giving more exposure to riders from smaller teams) they should be banned.
Keep it clean, keep it exciting, keep it unpredictable, give the chancers a better shot, that's what I say
Good man!left the forum March 20230 -
All power metres are are a tool to help you know where you're at.
But even I can ride at my threshold without one. You can feel it in your legs. Riders like getting a discreet reading infront of their face telling them how hard they're pushing but if they didn't have it they'd feel it anyway, just like we all do.
I'd like to get rid of them but not because I think they change racing at all - they don't, but I like the idea of riders having to race on feel. It's not a practical idea, more of a sentimental one.0 -
Ban fishnets.
And any electronic aids. Just a personal preference.0
