Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7

[ChewbaccaDefense]

...waiting for the first comment to suggest that this is the Arenberg Forest going woke...or communist...or socialist...

 

[Extinction]

Safety obsession, yes, sure, with ya...but...politically correct? Are they renaming the "Arenberg Trench" to something less suggestive?

I meant that, of course (having put it in quotation marks), as a metaphor, in the sense of demanding something be changed because some find it offensive to their moral sensibilities (in this case over "safety", which seems to have become the modern obsession). Can you image asking to make the Arenberg entrance "safer" in the De Vlaeminck-Moser era? I simply can't. Hell, they didn't even wear helmets!

 

[Extinction]

...waiting for the first comment to suggest that this is the Arenberg Forest going woke...or communist...or socialist...

Don't be ridiculous.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

Don't be ridiculous.

Man, have you read my posts? I'm ridiculous on a daily basis.

 

[Extinction]

Man, have you read my posts? I'm ridiculous on a daily basis.

I know, although if we come to take "woke" in the metaphorical sense here...😅

 

[Extinction]

I understand that. The danger moved from a crash that took down fewer people to a crash that could take down half of the peloton...but I think they will likely navigate the chicane perfectly fine, and let the race happen later, which is where it has been happening, mostly, in the last few years, anyway. It's been awhile since the race was won on the Arenberg. Sure, it whittles down the contenders, but it isn't the decisive sector.

I don't know, if the Arenberg does not whittle down the contenders you have a larger group going into the final sections of pavé and, so, have only postponed the "safety" issue. Can you image 40-50 guys strong barreling into and fighting it out on Mons-en-Pévèle (#11) and the back-to-back Camphin-en-Pévèle (#4) and Carrefour de l'Arbre (#3)?

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

I don't know, if the Arenberg does not whittle down the contenders you have a larger group going into the final sections of pavé and, so, have only postponed the "safety" issue. Can you image 40-50 guys strong barreling into and fighting it out on Mons-en-Pévèle (#11) and the back-to-back Camphin-en-Pévèle (#4) and Carrefour de l'Arbre (#3)?

Good points. I think we still may see a whittling down on Arenberg. One thing for sure, it will be raced in a way its never been raced.

Maybe they can try CX barriers next year?

 

[Rackham]

It's just indicative of this generation's obsession with safety and making things "politically correct".

I notice a lot of gaslighting as well.

They took something which wasn't a problem, then "fixed" that iconic & historical part of PR with a ridiculous decision merely a few days before the race... & then basically act like anyone who's against the change doesn't care about the riders or their safety.

 

[RedheadDane]

Can you image asking to make the Arenberg entrance "safer" in the De Vlaeminck-Moser era? I simply can't. Hell, they didn't even wear helmets!

So, those days really shouldn't be looked for as a good example.

 

[Extinction]

So, those days really shouldn't be looked for as a good example.

Apart from "good" and "bad" examples being subjective in such generational matters (nobody back then saw it as "bad example", it's simply the way it was done); I think a lot of stuff that goes on today is no better, but it's just that now you have a bunch of upitty, self-rightous fanatics on a moral trip, unaware (or pretend to be) of the larger and really important issues (much of which can't be discussed here).

 

[RedheadDane]

Apart from "good" and "bad" examples being subjective in such generational matters (nobody back then saw it as "bad example", it's simply the way it was done);

Of course they didn't think it was bad, they didn't know better, not to mention that they simply didn't have proper helmets
Good thing we're smarter now.
There's nothing subjective about whether or not wearing a helmet is a good idea, it simply is.

We have no idea what the result of the chicane will be, so let's wait until Sunday to decide whether it's a good idea.

 

[Scarponi]

Meanwhile in Australia: 'hey lads, hear me out: The Adam 260. Like paris-roubaix, but in the interests of safety, its 260 laps around Roubaix velodrome. It's not butchering history because the race hasn't started in paris for decades now. It can start anywhere. Obviously we'll have to call the whole thing off if its overcast due to the possibility of rain...'

We have Rugby League (not Union ) the toughest sport on the planet though

 

[Rackham]

Of course they didn't think it was bad, they didn't know better, not to mention that they simply didn't have proper helmets
Good thing we're smarter now.
There's nothing subjective about whether or not wearing a helmet is a good idea, it simply is.

We have no idea what the result of the chicane will be, so let's wait until Sunday to decide whether it's a good idea.

Arenberg isn't a problem though, whereas riding around at high speed without a helmet is.

It's not a comparable situation. The so-called 'trench' is just another section of the route. This is cycling, i.e. riders can crash, get hurt or even die anywhere. It's the horrible but nevertheless real darker facet of a sport in which men & women ride around at high speed on bicycles.

And I also guarantee this much: some people are going to get hurt this weekend (both in the men's & women's peloton). So what next? A crime scene forensic investigation into every single crash site with a 'chicane' added in next year's edition? The mindset governing the decision is IMO simply absurd.

 

[Bolder]

That “chicane” is too tight. From the third rider on, they’re going to be at a dead stop. Might as well just put a turnstile there…

 

[RedheadDane]

Arenberg isn't a problem though, whereas riding around at high speed without a helmet is.

Extinction, with his obsession with the "good" old days was the one who brought up how they didn't wear helmets, as if that's somehow a gotcha moment.
I just pointed out how that is a really good reason why those dark days should not be seen as an example of how things should be done.

I'm gonna enjoy the race same as ever, because I doubt the chicane will in any way lessen the spectacle.
Will the chicane be there next year? Well, guess we'll find out in about a year.

 

[Pantani_lives]

We have no idea what the result of the chicane will be, so let's wait until Sunday to decide whether it's a good idea.

That's what I don't like about this decision: Sunday's race will be an experiment. They should try it out before the race, not during the race. The "solution" might be worse than the original problem.

That chicane looks dangerous, because the road is so narrow. There will be a snarl-up. Someone who's in the back of a big group will be half a minute behind and have a hard time coming back. So positioning will be even more important, which can lead to even more jostling.

I wonder what percentage of the riders would support this decision.

 

[Rackham]

Extinction, with his obsession with the "good" old days was the one who brought up how they didn't wear helmets, as if that's somehow a gotcha moment.
I just pointed out how that is a really good reason why those dark days should not be seen as an example of how things should be done.

I'm gonna enjoy the race same as ever, because I doubt the chicane will in any way lessen the spectacle.
Will the chicane be there next year? Well, guess we'll find out in about a year.

The potential for bad pr is real, i.e. in the event there's a crash in that u-turn (because it's not really a chicane), there will be a bit of an outcry.

The race simply didn't need any of this.

 

[Berniece]

Why didn't they just put an artificial bridge there like they do at cx? It would slow them down, but not too much

 

[Extinction]

Of course they didn't think it was bad, they didn't know better, not to mention that they simply didn't have proper helmets
Good thing we're smarter now.
There's nothing subjective about whether or not wearing a helmet is a good idea, it simply is.

We have no idea what the result of the chicane will be, so let's wait until Sunday to decide whether it's a good idea.

You, see, however, this is the type of miope and, forgive me, self-important upittyness, I was referring to before. We are no smarter than they were then, we just have different viewpoints, opinions and consequently standards. "Knowing better" should thus be substituted with "seeing things differently". Whether or not it's a "good idea" to wear a helmet is a moot point, as doing so simply didn't exist back then - even if I'll gladly wear one today. I've ridden long enough, however, to remember when I trained without one, but I don't look back upon that period with a sense of shame or stupidity. And why would I? It's simply how we rode at the time. The breeze through your hair was magical, the natural sense liberating. Traffic was less, the automobiles smaller and not as powerful, nobody was on a cell phone at the wheel (and no helmet will save you if you get run down by a military grade, suv). So instead of frowning upon the past with condescension and a sense of superiority, this generation would do well to analyze the monsters in its own closet.

 

[RedheadDane]

So instead of frowning upon the past with condescension and a sense of superiority, this generation would do well to analyze the monsters in its own closet.

Not frowning upon, simply a part of progress. 50 years from now, people will hopefully be even smarter than we are now, and look back at the ways things are done now, shaking their heads at how stupid it is/was.

How is what you're doing any better? Constantly yapping on about how things were 50 years ago.

 

[Volderke]

We have Rugby League (not Union ) the toughest sport on the planet though

You don't have Calcio storico though!

 

[Andy262]

I notice a lot of gaslighting as well.

They took something which wasn't a problem, then "fixed" that iconic & historical part of PR with a ridiculous decision merely a few days before the race... & then basically act like anyone who's against the change doesn't care about the riders or their safety.

This stuff is destroying the Grand National too.

 

[Extinction]

Extinction, with his obsession with the "good" old days was the one who brought up how they didn't wear helmets, as if that's somehow a gotcha moment.
I just pointed out how that is a really good reason why those dark days should not be seen as an example of how things should be done.

I'm gonna enjoy the race same as ever, because I doubt the chicane will in any way lessen the spectacle.
Will the chicane be there next year? Well, guess we'll find out in about a year.

So typical, you have totally missed the point. I pointed out that once PR was tackled without helmets, to simply emphasize the difference between then and now, not to suggest it was better (or that not wearing helmets is better). Your sense of high-minded superiority has blinded your judgment and made you ridiculous. Back then safety was given a different space in the cycling discussion, which the evolution of the sport has increasingly prioritized to the point here, however, of demanding and absurd route change. Even if safety issues were of a different concern (lack of helmets, for example), they had the same fear of breaking heads and bones as today's riders. It's arrogant, however, to say they didn't "know better" or were just being stupid. Get over yourself, they were not. They in fact used more intelligence, because they didn't have the exacerbated pressure that leads today's riders to do stupid things on the bike in order to maintain or gain position or else be out of a contract next season.

 

[dobrien]

Arneberg Fissure

This also sounds disturbingly naughty. How about Arenberg Rut? Oh wait....

 

[Barkintheeye]

Well, I remember racing the Paris-Roubaix Sportive and it was quite incomprehensible to realize that the pros are bunchriding into Arenberg at +60 kph. I was "fortunate" as some other riders had crashed right at the entrance and everything came to a stop. Just to get going was difficult on the super-slippery cobbles. Then passing through the trench at about 20 kph was quite alright but it was clearly a humbling experience and not something I would want to do 3x faster together with +50 other riders packed up.

With ever increasing average speeds for the main peloton changes are bound to be considered. What was once something sketchy can today be completely dangerous. I must admit I view Paris-Roubaix and other races in awe but it's sad if it means the ending of careers for several riders each race. That's just not acceptable.