2012 Tour Down Under Stage 6: Adelaide Street Circuit, 90km, 2.WT

[BillytheKid]

I think the TDU doesn't plan a TT because of the same logistical problem they had for the tour of beijing. The teams would have to ship a bus filled with TT frames. Seeing the teams race a TT on their normal road frames would make it painfully obvious that they don't really have the TDU rated highly.

I do agree though that having a TT in there would make it more like a stage race.

You could ban their use in the TDU and still have a ITT or TTT will road bikes TT fitted.

 

[Fetisoff]

Oman has 5 flat stages and one MTF. TT is gone

Oh, ok. There's just nothing up on the official site so i wasn't sure.
I take it the MTF will be on the Jebel al Akbar or whatever again?

 

[gerundium]

You could ban their use in the TDU and still have a ITT or TTT will road bikes TT fitted.

Yes i know, they did the same in Beijing. Don't know if it was here but they had a report on Tony Martins setup for the Beijing time trial, they just fitted his road frame with 808s and a steep seat angle setup with a clip on TT bar.
They explained that it was just too expensive to ship the TT frames and the teams had agreed to race their road frames.

This is of course logical but to the organizers this does show that the teams don't want to spend money on their race basically because they don't care enough about it. So they don't do it, because then it won't be as obvious they don't care. that's my point.

 

[will10]

Did you watch the race yesterday?

Did I get up at 5am to watch 10 minutes of action in a race I wasn't arsed about? No, I did not.

Yes i know, they did the same in Beijing. Don't know if it was here but they had a report on Tony Martins setup for the Beijing time trial, they just fitted his road frame with 808s and a steep seat angle setup with a clip on TT bar.

No he didn't.

Your other two points seem to completely contradict each other??

They explained that it was just too expensive to ship the TT frames and the teams had agreed to race their road frames.

This is of course logical but to the organizers this does show that the teams don't want to spend money on their race basically because they don't care enough about it. So they don't do it, because then it won't be as obvious they don't care. that's my point.

 

[BillytheKid]

Did I get up at 5am to watch 10 minutes of action in a race I wasn't arsed about? No, I did not.


No he didn't.

Your other two points seem to completely contradict each other??

Here's the last K.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UHrifkVP4_4#!

 

[cineteq]

JIGP is kidding, right?

I guess, he just has a big admiration for his fearless leader

 

[iZnoGouD]

it would be so cool if they had a TT bah

Can't wait for Volta ao Algarve

 

[Libertine Seguros]

The WT events should have hierarchical status just like non-WT events. The 2.HC races are bigger than the 2.1 events for example.

With the current WT rules, these races supercede all others, but are, with the exception of the Grand Tours and maybe the monuments, equal with all other races of the same form (i.e. different structures for stage races and one day races) in terms of points paid. I have no opposition to the Tour Down Under being a World Tour race - it's a good way to ensure you have a good field and help build cycling down there. But, it's farcical that it offers as many WT points as Paris-Nice, País Vasco or the Tour de Suisse. This is a warm-up race, and that is the TDU's niche. They're happy with it - they get a field with a few stars that bring in fans, the racing isn't too difficult (anybody who wants a hard race in January will be in Argentina while it's on) so it's good mileage for the riders, and it's at a time of year that allows riders to take the time out of their schedules to cover for the inevitable jetlag caused without affecting too many other events.

I just feel that there should perhaps be three tiers to the UCI's World Tour races (and accordingly the points paid) just as there are three tiers to the UCI's non-WT races (.HC, .1 and .2).

WT-1 (GTs, Monuments)
WT-2 (major stage races eg Suisse, País Vasco, Paris-Nice, T-A, and major one day races eg Amstel, Flèche, G-W)
WT-3 (minor stage races eg TDU, Beijing, Eneco, and minor one day races eg Plouay, Vattenfall).

The big teams still have to show up, but the points are not quite as ridiculously skewed as at present.

 

[will10]

Here's the last K.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UHrifkVP4_4#!

I've already seen it, the wonders of youtube as opposed to watching it live when i should be in bed.

 

[gerundium]

Did I get up at 5am to watch 10 minutes of action in a race I wasn't arsed about? No, I did not.


No he didn't.

Your other two points seem to completely contradict each other??

Yes you are right, i thought i remembered that he was riding clip ons but they weren't. Can't seem to find the article about tony's setup either.

 

[Fetisoff]

The WT events should have hierarchical status just like non-WT events. The 2.HC races are bigger than the 2.1 events for example.

With the current WT rules, these races supercede all others, but are, with the exception of the Grand Tours and maybe the monuments, equal with all other races of the same form (i.e. different structures for stage races and one day races) in terms of points paid. I have no opposition to the Tour Down Under being a World Tour race - it's a good way to ensure you have a good field and help build cycling down there. But, it's farcical that it offers as many WT points as Paris-Nice, País Vasco or the Tour de Suisse. This is a warm-up race, and that is the TDU's niche. They're happy with it - they get a field with a few stars that bring in fans, the racing isn't too difficult (anybody who wants a hard race in January will be in Argentina while it's on) so it's good mileage for the riders, and it's at a time of year that allows riders to take the time out of their schedules to cover for the inevitable jetlag caused without affecting too many other events.

I just feel that there should perhaps be three tiers to the UCI's World Tour races (and accordingly the points paid) just as there are three tiers to the UCI's non-WT races (.HC, .1 and .2).

WT-1 (GTs, Monuments)
WT-2 (major stage races eg Suisse, País Vasco, Paris-Nice, T-A, and major one day races eg Amstel, Flèche, G-W)
WT-3 (minor stage races eg TDU, Beijing, Eneco, and minor one day races eg Plouay, Vattenfall).

The big teams still have to show up, but the points are not quite as ridiculously skewed as at present.

You're absolutely right on this, Libertine, the notion of someone taking the TDU and the Eneco Tour for example having the same amount of points as the TDF winner, and more points than the Giro winner is somewhat ridiculous.

One thing of note though: how much do the World Tour points mean to most riders and teams? If I'm not mistaken, the sporting value for the teams is calculated not according to the UCI world tour points, but according to a formula that takes in account world tour races, 2.HC and 2.1 races, taking both individual and team ranking in these races, and this formula is closer to the CQ ranking, than the UCI ranking (i.e. more points for "more important" races)?

 

[maltiv]

Funny with the people who constantly complain about TDU being rubbish, boring etc yet they're up in the middle of the night to watch it and discuss it on the forum. I'm no big fan of TDU either but this year's edition was pretty good, with 3 good/decent stages. The hilltop finish really helped the excitement of the race in my opinion.

 

[hilltopfinisher]

The WT events should have hierarchical status just like non-WT events. The 2.HC races are bigger than the 2.1 events for example.

With the current WT rules, these races supercede all others, but are, with the exception of the Grand Tours and maybe the monuments, equal with all other races of the same form (i.e. different structures for stage races and one day races) in terms of points paid. I have no opposition to the Tour Down Under being a World Tour race - it's a good way to ensure you have a good field and help build cycling down there. But, it's farcical that it offers as many WT points as Paris-Nice, País Vasco or the Tour de Suisse. This is a warm-up race, and that is the TDU's niche. They're happy with it - they get a field with a few stars that bring in fans, the racing isn't too difficult (anybody who wants a hard race in January will be in Argentina while it's on) so it's good mileage for the riders, and it's at a time of year that allows riders to take the time out of their schedules to cover for the inevitable jetlag caused without affecting too many other events.

I just feel that there should perhaps be three tiers to the UCI's World Tour races (and accordingly the points paid) just as there are three tiers to the UCI's non-WT races (.HC, .1 and .2).

WT-1 (GTs, Monuments)
WT-2 (major stage races eg Suisse, País Vasco, Paris-Nice, T-A, and major one day races eg Amstel, Flèche, G-W)
WT-3 (minor stage races eg TDU, Beijing, Eneco, and minor one day races eg Plouay, Vattenfall).

The big teams still have to show up, but the points are not quite as ridiculously skewed as at present.

the strange thing is this is already the case with the one day races (monuments are 100 points, other WT one day races are 80) - so its odd that TDU, Beijing and Eneco arent less than the established/historic stage races)

 

[El Pistolero]

Funny with the people who constantly complain about TDU being rubbish, boring etc yet they're up in the middle of the night to watch it and discuss it on the forum. I'm no big fan of TDU either but this year's edition was pretty good, with 3 good/decent stages. The hilltop finish really helped the excitement of the race in my opinion.

I wouldn't call the race it self bad, but everything else most certainly sucks. No online streams available only for the queen stage, slow information after the race has finished, annoying commentators, no kangeroos, too early in the year to be a World Tour event, etc

 

[Libertine Seguros]

One thing of note though: how much do the World Tour points mean to most riders and teams? If I'm not mistaken, the sporting value for the teams is calculated not according to the UCI world tour points, but according to a formula that takes in account world tour races, 2.HC and 2.1 races, taking both individual and team ranking in these races, and this formula is closer to the CQ ranking, than the UCI ranking (i.e. more points for "more important" races)?

But the TDU, Beijing, Eneco etc still pay the same points as other WT stage races, so they are still high value in that system.

They also pay a disproportionately high number of points towards the system determining how many riders a team has at the Worlds.

 

[maltiv]

I wouldn't call the race it self bad, but everything else most certainly sucks. No online streams available only for the queen stage, slow information after the race has finished, annoying commentators, no kangeroos, too early in the year to be a World Tour event, etc

That's true, but at least it's not as bad as Volta a Catalunya. Would probably be a good idea to exclude TDU from the WT as that would probably lead to fewer cyclists screwing up their peak because their team/sponsors wants results in january...

 

[Fetisoff]

But the TDU, Beijing, Eneco etc still pay the same points as other WT stage races, so they are still high value in that system.

They also pay a disproportionately high number of points towards the system determining how many riders a team has at the Worlds.

Forgot about the Worlds.
And just looked at the way CQ is calculated, and surprisingly even there a 2.WT race is a 2.WT race, gets the same points for Nice as it does for TDU. For some reason I thought it was tiered for WT races, but apparently just the GT's, same as WorldTour ranking.

So yeah, I guess I stand double corrected, and shamefully remove myself from this conversation.

 

[benpounder]

I don't wish to burst your bubble but no-one cares about the TDU...

Yes you do.

Listen, I realize that most of the non-European races don't have the killer tracks that most of us would like to see. But it is so tiresome reading all of the gratuitously negative comments.

Races like the TDU, or the ToC are relatively young races - before they can venture into the interesting terrain, they have to show economic viability. Yesterday's stage was a good stage - not a great stage, but a darn good stage raced aggressively - but the trade-off is having a downtown crit (just like the TdF does but without the champagne promenade beforehand) where actual fans can watch the race for more than just a few seconds.

lighten up...

 

[El Pistolero]

Yes you do.

Listen, I realize that most of the non-European races don't have the killer tracks that most of us would like to see. But it is so tiresome reading all of the gratuitously negative comments.

Races like the TDU, or the ToC are relatively young races - before they can venture into the interesting terrain, they have to show economic viability. Yesterday's stage was a good stage - not a great stage, but a darn good stage raced aggressively - but the trade-off is having a downtown crit (just like the TdF does but without the champagne promenade beforehand) where actual fans can watch the race for more than just a few seconds.

lighten up...

If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it does it make a sound?

 

[The Hitch]

sub-100km crits have no business being in the World Tour. In fact, crits full stop have no business being in the World Tour.

Isn't the Vuelta finishing stage like 90k. Come to think of it Champs Elysee is even less I think.

If its a sprint its a sprint Do you really care if theyve been riding around for 200km or 50km before the 10 second bit you watch?

Crits in big cities are quite entertaining because the riders go by several times and you can walk around and meet them in different spots.

 

[will10]

Yes you do.

Listen, I realize that most of the non-European races don't have the killer tracks that most of us would like to see. But it is so tiresome reading all of the gratuitously negative comments.

Races like the TDU, or the ToC are relatively young races - before they can venture into the interesting terrain, they have to show economic viability. Yesterday's stage was a good stage - not a great stage, but a darn good stage raced aggressively - but the trade-off is having a downtown crit (just like the TdF does but without the champagne promenade beforehand) where actual fans can watch the race for more than just a few seconds.

lighten up...

Yes I do what, care about the TDU or want to burst your bubble?

My issues with the TDU are:
1) Dull parcours.
2) Same recycled stages over and over and over again.
3) Massive overhype by CN and some other anglo-media outlets. It's a warmup race that gets treated like the TdF because we've been starved of racing for months. Phil and Paul are the straw that breaks the camel's back.
4) The massive chunk of WT points earned. Winning Paris - Nice is worth the same amount of points FFS. Ask any rider in the peloton which one they'd rather win, I guarantee 99% of the ones that don't have an "Australia" printed on their passports will say Paris - Nice.

 

[The Hitch]

If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it does it make a sound?

Yes. The Gravitational Potential energy of the tree gets converted to kinetic energy as it falls.

When the tree hits the ground this kinetic energy gets converted to sound energy.

The laws of physics don't make exceptions to mankind

 

[Parrulo]

Yes I do what, care about the TDU or want to burst your bubble?

My issues with the TDU are:
1) Dull parcours.
2) Same recycled stages over and over and over again.
3) Massive overhype by CN and some other anglo-media outlets. It's a warmup race that gets treated like the TdF because we've been starved of racing for months. Phil and Paul are the straw that breaks the camel's back.
4) The massive chunk of WT points earned. Winning Paris - Nice is worth the same amount of points FFS. Ask any rider in the peloton which one they'd rather win, I guarantee 99% of the ones that don't have an "Australia" printed on their passports will say Paris - Nice.

i would say all cyclists even australian ones would prefer to win P-N.

also i agree with libertine's idea for sub-categories within the world tour.

 

[El Pistolero]

Yes. The Gravitational Potential energy of the tree gets converted to kinetic energy as it falls.

When the tree hits the ground this kinetic energy gets converted to sound energy.

The laws of physics don't make exceptions to mankind

Point is, there's no one there to hear it. Just like there's no one here to see the race except the queen stage and some crappy highlights that only show the last 2km.

 

[benpounder]

Yes I do what, care about the TDU or want to burst your bubble?

To burst someone else's bubble. We already know that you don't care about the TdU. (Which begs the question...)

Point is, there's no one there to hear it. Just like there's no one here to see the race except the queen stage and some crappy highlights that only show the last 2km.

I agree that the coverage is sub-standard - live streaming from the organizers website should be nearly market standard. That said, I dont particularly care for a number of stage races. I'll read the race reports for Tour of Colombia, or Turkey, or Oman, but I do not feel compelled to look for those respective forum threads just to say how stupid that particular race is.

Knocking down another race does not make the races I adore any better...