OP
OP
A.Z.KOETSIER
Active Member
Indeed, You making me blush.
Has Grand Tour cycling just become about protected climbers?
- Thread starter A.Z.KOETSIER
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Indeed, You making me blush.
Jacqueslemac
Active Member
- Location
- Mostly Normandy, sometimes Norfolk
I remember Andy Schleck complaining that Tours shouldn't be decided by how good a rider was descending. I think that was after he crashed on a wet descent and his Tour ambition slipped further away.
The official response from ASO was that grand tours should be won by the most complete riders able to do everything. Give or take breakaways and bunch sprints, that's probably what happens.
Take away time lost in the mountains and the podium would look different. Take away time lost in ITTs and the podium would look different. The podium probably represents riders who lose the least amount of time in their weakest discipline, even that means their tactical nous or the strength of their team.
The official response from ASO was that grand tours should be won by the most complete riders able to do everything. Give or take breakaways and bunch sprints, that's probably what happens.
Take away time lost in the mountains and the podium would look different. Take away time lost in ITTs and the podium would look different. The podium probably represents riders who lose the least amount of time in their weakest discipline, even that means their tactical nous or the strength of their team.
oldroadman
Veteran
- Location
- Ubique
Dark now, so indoors and having a tread. Six rider teams are OK up to 6-8 days. Even then some ToB teams last year were down to 3 and struggling by the last day, in an 8 day race. If you wnt to see teams finishing with 1 or 2 riders in a 3 week tour, start with 6. At least one rider per team will:
get ill and retire
crash and become ineffective to a point where stopping is a likely option
get eliminated
A slight worst case but straight away that's 3 left. A six man team cannot run a lead out train and have some people to protect a GC rider.
With 9 riders it's possible. This helps make better racing on what people like to call easy days. These people should try an easy day. After 3, max, they would be off home.
In the classics team are 8 riders, and everyone except the leader is disposable. Not the same when 21 stages are in prospect.
Whoever suggested split stages should think hard. How would it be to race 100km in a morning (start about 10.00 which means up to eat by 06.30), have a couple of hours break, re-prepare and race again in the afternoon, with the usual 17.00 ish TV finish. Then travel 90 minutes from the finish to hotel, massage, eat, and with any luck bed by 23.00. Up again next day for the same. I recall a 5 day that was run that way - once. After day 3 the "work to rule" was on, no racing until 20km to go, before that 35km/hr. No fighting on the climbs, no rushing for intermediate sprints. Day 4 a sit down at the afternoon start until the organisers agreed to make day 5 a single stage with a sprint point at the morning finish. All to make the organisers more money, with more starts and finishes. It never happened again - wonder why?
The way things run now - shorter stages, shorter transfers, better hotels, radios (going down the divisions next season) all work. Let's not go backwards. Nostalgia is always rose-tinted. Just remember that all the things now are making doping less likely because nobody (press, public, fans, organisers) expects super efforts day after day. Best keep it that way.
get ill and retire
crash and become ineffective to a point where stopping is a likely option
get eliminated
A slight worst case but straight away that's 3 left. A six man team cannot run a lead out train and have some people to protect a GC rider.
With 9 riders it's possible. This helps make better racing on what people like to call easy days. These people should try an easy day. After 3, max, they would be off home.
In the classics team are 8 riders, and everyone except the leader is disposable. Not the same when 21 stages are in prospect.
Whoever suggested split stages should think hard. How would it be to race 100km in a morning (start about 10.00 which means up to eat by 06.30), have a couple of hours break, re-prepare and race again in the afternoon, with the usual 17.00 ish TV finish. Then travel 90 minutes from the finish to hotel, massage, eat, and with any luck bed by 23.00. Up again next day for the same. I recall a 5 day that was run that way - once. After day 3 the "work to rule" was on, no racing until 20km to go, before that 35km/hr. No fighting on the climbs, no rushing for intermediate sprints. Day 4 a sit down at the afternoon start until the organisers agreed to make day 5 a single stage with a sprint point at the morning finish. All to make the organisers more money, with more starts and finishes. It never happened again - wonder why?
The way things run now - shorter stages, shorter transfers, better hotels, radios (going down the divisions next season) all work. Let's not go backwards. Nostalgia is always rose-tinted. Just remember that all the things now are making doping less likely because nobody (press, public, fans, organisers) expects super efforts day after day. Best keep it that way.
Pro Tour Punditry
Guru
It was me, not too hard to work out since I posted under my name and it was posted within the last hour in a thread with only 3 pages.
And as for "thinking hard" you might want to "think hard" yourself and work out if it was a serious comment or not.
OP
OP
A.Z.KOETSIER
Active Member
I agree the sprinter 'rest days' allow the GC battle to be fought with more aggression and they are vital.
I would just like to see more ITT kilos and/or Classic stages at the sacrifice of some mountain stages. BLASPHEMY !!! now wait hear me out please.
I assume when a directeur sportif looks at the route the team is built accordingly. Now if there is no hope for a Tony Martin/Cancellera/Sagan there fate to domestic duties will be sealed before the start line.
Lets say there was a chance for the 'Classic' riders to make big gains, they would then fight in the mountains. There would be probably be massive time gains and losses on different days where the pure climbers would take minutes in the high mountains and the Classsic/TT guys would try to take it back on +50km TT/Classic stages
(and classic stages don't all have to have cobbles, Amstel Gold)
Froome would probably still win, but we would see a wider range of rider types fight it out, 80kg vs 55kg for GC.
oldroadman
Veteran
- Location
- Ubique
Thank you for your kind comment. Most helpful. I prefer to take comments seriously, simply for courtesy. In this case I made an error of reading, so stand admonished.
Pro Tour Punditry
Guru
Limburg is nominated for a 2017 TdF stage - although the Dutch cycling federation and ASO seem to be having a bit of a squabble about money just now so ASO may go play with someone else if they don't get their way.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
Livarot this year, Limburg next. The Tour is definitely paying homage to stinky washed rind cheese.
OP
OP
A.Z.KOETSIER
Active Member
Awesome stuff hope it works out, thanks for info.
Pro Tour Punditry
Guru
And what about Dusseldorf as the grand depart for 2017? The "council" has just voted 40-39 to make a bid.
OP
OP
A.Z.KOETSIER
Active Member
ah, I don't know to much about that area. would be cool if they rode down to the Old Nurburging and did a lap or 2. The first professional world championships were held there and apparently the gradients are quite something.
Good to see Germany open up to cycling again thou, I believe they also back to showing cycling on public broadcast.
oldroadman
Veteran
- Location
- Ubique
That may have been the race when the great Les West was 4th, and only a bit of cramp kept him off the podium. He's still riding masters races to this day! Smashing bloke, if you heard him having moan in the changing rooms before a race, legs not good, everyone knew we were in for a very hard time the minute a hill came into sight.
