Forum home Road cycling forum Pro race

Race Radios (NOT) Banned in 2015

24

Posts

  • iainf72iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    Decent teams will ride to a strategy, rather than use reactionary tactics.

    You know what they call someone who uses reactionary moves in chess? The loser.

    I think it was in the cycling podcast they mentioned how bloody boring the radio stuff is when you actually hear it.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • squired wrote:
    Personally I'd rather see the number of riders in a team in each race reduced. I think that would make a bigger difference than having or getting rid of race radios. As for race radios, I would just have them on open frequencies (to all teams in the race), so any team can listen in to any other team whenever they want. That would reduce/eliminate any controlling of tactics, without impacting the "safety" element.


    I also think making stages/races shorter would provide a more aggressive race with more riders capable of winning and potentially less doping too. Really is there any need for the average race to be over 200k? long races could be 230-250 instead of 300.
  • DeVlaeminckDeVlaeminck Posts: 7,032
    RichN95 wrote:
    Well we aren't sat in every car in every race but off the top of my head at least one rider said he was called back when he followed Floyd Landis on his famous solo escape - the car told him there was no way Landis could sustain that effort. Another would be the car telling Froome to ease off when he was dropping Wiggins.

    That's two - it's fairly obvious that the DSs do make decisions at times why wouldn't they.
    And they are both decisions that were fairly obvious tactical decisions (although we don't really know what Froome was thinking).

    In 1985 Greg LeMond attacked Hinault alongside with Stephen Roche. Had there been radios his DS would have called him back and Hinault, not LeMond, would have won that year. Oh, no hang on. LeMond didn't win. The DS just drove up to him and shouted at him to stop riding.

    Most tactical decisions are either preplaned, pretty obvious, or not particularly urgent. For those that are not, the rider is a far better placed to make the decisions, because he knows how he is feeling and isn't subject to a ten second TV delay.

    Yes of course *most* tactical decisions are preplanned but most is not all. You asked for examples and I gave you a couple off the top of my head. Yes cars can drive up and give orders but they are rarely able to drive up immediately and in bike racing once a decision is made you can't always change your mind a couple of minutes later - if Wiggins had let the group go by some distance what then ?

    As far as riders being far better placed to make decisions - in some ways maybe but the rider doesn't always know where the rest of his team are, what the terrain ahead is like and so on. In the middle of a peloton or half way up a mountain in the heat of racing riders can make different decisions to the guys in the car for a whole host of reasons sometimes simply putting their own interests over that of the team and if you think the guys in the car leave it all up to the rider because "he knows how he is feeling" we will just have to disagree.
    AFC Mercia women - sign for us
  • AnonymousAnonymous Posts: 79,692
    RichN95 wrote:
    Gazzetta67 wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Gazzetta67 wrote:
    Surely this is the END for Team Sky. Do they actually know how to race without race radio's ? tin helmet on :mrgreen:
    May I present Exhibit A: the 2011 World Championships.

    I was trying to be a tad sarky - Ok not EVERY race. or FROOOOOOOOOMY aka sean yates. :lol:
    But the point is that Sky would probably be the least effected by it (if it happened). They ride in preplanned, rigorously trained for manner with little variation. (Hence why they are so much better at stage races than one-dayers)

    As if every other team goes into a race and doesn't have a strategy, watch the OGE back stage passes when they are talking about plans for getting Gerrans to win. They have plans. Do you think TS sat in the bus at the Veulta and said do what you want, it'll be fine. They would have worked out how to isolate froome, with changes in pace, how to make sure Bert was fresh to attack at certain points etc.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,203
    sjmclean wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Gazzetta67 wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Gazzetta67 wrote:
    Surely this is the END for Team Sky. Do they actually know how to race without race radio's ? tin helmet on :mrgreen:
    May I present Exhibit A: the 2011 World Championships.

    I was trying to be a tad sarky - Ok not EVERY race. or FROOOOOOOOOMY aka sean yates. :lol:
    But the point is that Sky would probably be the least effected by it (if it happened). They ride in preplanned, rigorously trained for manner with little variation. (Hence why they are so much better at stage races than one-dayers)

    As if every other team goes into a race and doesn't have a strategy, watch the OGE back stage passes when they are talking about plans for getting Gerrans to win. They have plans. Do you think TS sat in the bus at the Veulta and said do what you want, it'll be fine. They would have worked out how to isolate froome, with changes in pace, how to make sure Bert was fresh to attack at certain points etc.
    Of course they have strategies. They're just not as formulaic and predictable as Sky who tend to take control of the pace more often.

    When I say that riders think for themselves, I mean it's within a pre-planned framework - not making it up as they go along. So Gerrans and Contador make their own tactical decisions rather than waiting 15-20 seconds for the DS to do it for them. Don't you think they are capable of that by now?

    To go back to the football analogy - a far more tactically complex sport - Chelsea, for example, will work on tactical theory and do drills in training, lead by Mourinho and the coaches, but when they are on the pitch they have to decide for themselves who to mark and who to pass to. The players make their own choices, but within a framework.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 55,746 Lives Here
    RichN95 wrote:
    I think it might still come even if not next year. As I said in my first post I do agree that the majority of the time it'll make naff all difference but I do think there are times when we'll see a different outcome and when that does happen it'll tend to a more exciting one. There are times when a DS micromanages from the car - if only because they often have better information than the rider - they have the route map in front of them and often know where their other riders are.
    But where are these examples of micromanaging? I can really only think of one example* of a DS making a tactical call on a radio that wouldn't have been obvious to the rider himself. Nine times out of ten when I see a DS on the radio he is shouting "Go, go, go! Si, si,si"

    *Cancellara attacking in Paris-Roubaix when his DS noticed that Boonen wasn't paying attention.

    2014 Het Volk was fundamentally changed because of lack of radios.

    It happens and in one day races that TV information matters a lot.

    You saw lots of riders shouting at the TV camera men in kuurne Brussel kuurne asking what the race situation was because they couldn't get it from radios and they hadn't paid attention.

    It's a falacy that radios don't change races. Just because 98% isn't, doesn't matter. Cycling is raced over hours days and weeks but is decided by short key moments, some of which are fundamentally affected by radio use.

    It's whether you think the effect is positive or not.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,203
    2014 Het Volk was fundamentally changed because of lack of radios.

    It happens and in one day races that TV information matters a lot.

    You saw lots of riders shouting at the TV camera men in kuurne Brussel kuurne asking what the race situation was because they couldn't get it from radios and they hadn't paid attention.

    It's a falacy that radios don't change races. Just because 98% isn't, doesn't matter. Cycling is raced over hours days and weeks but is decided by short key moments, some of which are fundamentally affected by radio use.

    It's whether you think the effect is positive or not.
    Radios allow riders to have the information they need to make better quality decisions. If a team is relying on a DS half watching patchy TV coverage on a six inch screen at least a ten second delay, and might be on an advert break, via a crackling radio which doesn't work half the time for their tactical decisions then they won't be winning anything.
    Radios allow DSs to tell riders what is happening not what to do. Giving riders information is not a bad thing. I rather like seeing sportsmen being allowed to be the best they can, not being hampered by lack of information and made to look fools.

    I think some people think that DSs sit in their cars constantly barking minute instructions as though they are playing PCM.

    (You say Het Volk was changed, but the riders still came in in twos and threes - same as any other year. In KBK they may not have know what was happening and as a result we got a joke race).
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • DeVlaeminckDeVlaeminck Posts: 7,032
    Except that isn't what happened in the Froome example - he didn't ease up because they gave him the information Wiggins was getting dropped he eased up because they told him to ease up.
    AFC Mercia women - sign for us
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,203
    Except that isn't what happened in the Froome example - he didn't ease up because they gave him the information Wiggins was getting dropped he eased up because they told him to ease up.
    What is actually said, in the version we saw, is "I hope you've got the OK from Brad from that" followed by "Froomey, Brad is hurting". The 'order' to 'stay with Wiggins at all times' comes long before he attacks. Editing makes it hard to tell what was said excatly when though.
    So Froome is given information which he reacts to by reverting to the pre-conceived plan. At no point does Yates make a fresh tactical decision.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 55,746 Lives Here
    Had het volk had radios any normal DS (and sky said so) they'd have let Stannard wait for ebh because 99 times out of 100 GvA outsprints Stannard but not EbH.

    That's fundamental. Yes it's just information but that's irrelevant. There's a different tactical situation with or without radios.

    So it does change. You make out only DS' telling their riders what to do is important but it's not.

    Just accept having race radios can and do have an effect on how the race is ridden.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,203
    So it does change. You make out only DS' telling their riders what to do is important but it's not.

    Just accept having race radios can and do have an effect on how the race is ridden.
    I'm not saying it makes no changes. But does it make a change for the better? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. People seem to think that without radios races will descend into some sort of thrill a minute anarchy. And that once a DS sits in car he is suddenly bestowed with some sort of tactical genius that was unavailable to him the previous season as a rider.

    I've said it before, but if people want to return to the exciting racing they think happened before radios, then ban live TV and just show 30 minute highlights.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • DeVlaeminckDeVlaeminck Posts: 7,032
    RichN95 wrote:
    Except that isn't what happened in the Froome example - he didn't ease up because they gave him the information Wiggins was getting dropped he eased up because they told him to ease up.
    What is actually said, in the version we saw, is "I hope you've got the OK from Brad from that" followed by "Froomey, Brad is hurting". The 'order' to 'stay with Wiggins at all times' comes long before he attacks. Editing makes it hard to tell what was said excatly when though.
    So Froome is given information which he reacts to by reverting to the pre-conceived plan. At no point does Yates make a fresh tactical decision.


    The relevant point is the radio was used to call a rider back who was on the attack - the radio likely made a difference to the outcome or at least the way the finale played out.
    AFC Mercia women - sign for us
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,203
    The relevant point is the radio was used to call a rider back who was on the attack - the radio likely made a difference to the outcome or at least the way the finale played out.
    But at no time was he called back (as far as we could see). He was just told that Wiggins was hurting. (Just as the attack was triggered by the information that Evans (2nd on GC at the time) was suffering).

    Anyway, getting back to your original idea that DSs 'micromanage' riders. What do you actually think they do?
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Ber NardBer Nard Posts: 827
    Change of plan:
    the Inner Ring
    @inrng
    Race radios *will be allowed* in 2015, UCI have been in touch to say their rulebook will be amended early in 2015 to reflect this

    Would have been nice to at least try it and see what happens.
  • AnonymousAnonymous Posts: 79,692
    RichN95 wrote:
    The relevant point is the radio was used to call a rider back who was on the attack - the radio likely made a difference to the outcome or at least the way the finale played out.
    But at no time was he called back (as far as we could see). He was just told that Wiggins was hurting. (Just as the attack was triggered by the information that Evans (2nd on GC at the time) was suffering).

    Anyway, getting back to your original idea that DSs 'micromanage' riders. What do you actually think they do?

    They said "no Froome no Froome" over and over again, Froome then claimed that he thought they were saying go. He had it all preplanned, he had the clause in his contract ready and everything. He knew he was going to attack at that point.
  • deejaydeejay Posts: 3,138
    sjmclean wrote:
    He knew he was going to attack at that point.
    Having only been a Wiggins wheelsucker for 90 odd % of that race so far.
    The only wheel he had had to watch, but Wiggins had several wheels to keep him concentrated on and he stayed with any GC Number 2 or 3 or 4 to the finish. ??
    Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 1972
  • salsiccia1salsiccia1 Posts: 3,651
    Ber Nard wrote:
    Change of plan:
    the Inner Ring
    @inrng
    Race radios *will be allowed* in 2015, UCI have been in touch to say their rulebook will be amended early in 2015 to reflect this

    Would have been nice to at least try it and see what happens.

    I agree. I'm not 'it was better in my day' person, but I do think when riders had to think a bit more for themselves the racing was better.
    It's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.
  • DeVlaeminckDeVlaeminck Posts: 7,032
    RichN95 wrote:
    The relevant point is the radio was used to call a rider back who was on the attack - the radio likely made a difference to the outcome or at least the way the finale played out.
    But at no time was he called back (as far as we could see). He was just told that Wiggins was hurting. (Just as the attack was triggered by the information that Evans (2nd on GC at the time) was suffering).

    Anyway, getting back to your original idea that DSs 'micromanage' riders. What do you actually think they do?


    Oh give it up - Froome himself said after the stage he was called back - "they asked me to slow down" were his exact words - we all know he was called back including you.
    AFC Mercia women - sign for us
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,203
    RichN95 wrote:
    The relevant point is the radio was used to call a rider back who was on the attack - the radio likely made a difference to the outcome or at least the way the finale played out.
    But at no time was he called back (as far as we could see). He was just told that Wiggins was hurting. (Just as the attack was triggered by the information that Evans (2nd on GC at the time) was suffering).

    Anyway, getting back to your original idea that DSs 'micromanage' riders. What do you actually think they do?
    Oh give it up - Froome himself said after the stage he was called back - "they asked me to slow down" were his exact words - we all know he was called back including you.
    Have it your way. It's a diversion.

    Now back to the issue. Your original idea that DSs 'micromanage' riders. What do you actually think they do?
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • RichN95 wrote:
    The relevant point is the radio was used to call a rider back who was on the attack - the radio likely made a difference to the outcome or at least the way the finale played out.
    But at no time was he called back (as far as we could see). He was just told that Wiggins was hurting. (Just as the attack was triggered by the information that Evans (2nd on GC at the time) was suffering).

    Anyway, getting back to your original idea that DSs 'micromanage' riders. What do you actually think they do?

    Do you really think that 'i hope you got the ok from brad for that' isn't calling the rider back?
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,203
    Do you really think that 'i hope you got the ok from brad for that' isn't calling the rider back?
    It was obviously implied. It was just a reminder to stick to the plan.

    But that isn't really that relevant to race radios and the idea that DSs 'micromange' riders. I'm interested what those that want to ban radios actually think the DSs say during a race - on an average day to day basis - not some big incident.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • iainf72iainf72 Posts: 15,784

    Do you really think that 'i hope you got the ok from brad for that' isn't calling the rider back?

    Different stage I think in that case

    Anyway, doesn't "I hope you got the ok from brad for that" indicate decisions are taken on the road, and not via radio?

    :P

    If you wanted to make racing really exciting, you'd limit it to 1 hour of live TV coverage.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,203
    iainf72 wrote:
    If you wanted to make racing really exciting, you'd limit it to 1 hour of live TV coverage.
    No, you'd limit it to just a highlights show. The more exciting pre-radio days that people are nostalgic for also pre-date them have live TV coverage.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • thomthomthomthom Posts: 3,574
    iainf72 wrote:

    If you wanted to make racing really exciting, you'd limit it to 1 hour of live TV coverage.

    Well, that's why the Vuelta gets the nod every year despite having awful routes. There's one hour of live racing with a steep finish and people are eating it raw.
  • ddraverddraver Posts: 22,543
    It's rare, but when it happens ThomThom I agree with you totally....
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 55,746 Lives Here
    I quite like knowing more than the riders do and seeing how they react to limited information.

    So I'm in favour of a ban.


    Leads to more tactical dilemmas for riders.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,203
    I quite like knowing more than the riders do and seeing how they react to limited information.

    So I'm in favour of a ban.

    Leads to more tactical dilemmas for riders.
    Uncertainty (in almost all sports) promotes defensive and conservative tactics. Everyone holds station until further information is available. It leads to less tactical dilemmas. If you have a teammate ahead of you, you don't ride and if you don't you ride. And that's it. The lack of information eliminates the need for judgement. You just stick to a formula if you don't want a bollocking from the team boss at the end of day.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 55,746 Lives Here
    That's more or less how it plays out anyway. Race radios hardly make for swashbuckling riding either.

    Without radios those with smaller chances can try to capitalise on lack of information.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,203
    That's more or less how it plays out anyway. Race radios hardly make for swashbuckling riding either.

    Without radios those with smaller chances can try to capitalise on lack of information.
    It seems to me that it's not radios you object to, but common sense. You want riders to abandon sensible tactics for stupid ones. Removing radios won't achieve that.

    People need to embrace the fact that cycling is really boring a lot of the time. If you want real changes make the races shorter and teams smaller. But then you'll get the Luddites clinging to history and tradition (a lot of which is wrong).
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 55,746 Lives Here
    RichN95 wrote:
    That's more or less how it plays out anyway. Race radios hardly make for swashbuckling riding either.

    Without radios those with smaller chances can try to capitalise on lack of information.
    It seems to me that it's not radios you object to, but common sense. You want riders to abandon sensible tactics for stupid ones. Removing radios won't achieve that.

    People need to embrace the fact that cycling is really boring a lot of the time. If you want real changes make the races shorter and teams smaller. But then you'll get the Luddites clinging to history and tradition (a lot of which is wrong).

    I'm not complaining cycling is boring.

    Nor am I asking for stupid tactics.

    I think the spectacle would be improved for reasons I've given above.

    Stop trying to say my argument is actually something else when it isn't!!
Sign In or Register to comment.