Giro d'Italia 2023 Giro d'Italia, Stage 13: Borgofranco d’Ivrea – Crans Montana, 199 km (Friday, May 19th)

[Red Rick]

No, go down the usual they descend after the gravel part.

Was comparing if a descent as technical as the one we had yesterday but already known from being present in several editions would generate as much concern and panic as a new one.

Regular descent is nothing special. Wouldn't create a fuss these even today

 

[jaylew]

I just watched this in the car on the way home from a race with no sound as my friend was playing music and I thought it was awesome and really entertaining. Somehow the stuff up front was good enough for me to forget the gc battle. I may not be 100% sober, however.

 

[houtdffan]

What should have happened is the UCI should have told the teams, the stage goes on as scheduled. If you don't like it, abandon. If only 3 teams continue, so be it

 

[CyclistAbi]

How is integrity acheived by compromise and refusal to accept a challenge?

In what way would the integrity of Giro 2023 have been lost by riding through some rain to the foot of the San Bernardo, then climbing and descending its very well maintained roads in dry weather?

Imagine what would happen if stage 13 would go on as is. And if there would be either of this things happening. Massive crash, a lot of smaller scale crashes, GC favorite(s) abandoning ... In my opinion then this Giro edition would be effectively over. Compared to now when things settled and we still have a race.

It was for many years, and many suspect that it still is.
sorry, couldn't resist.

It never really was about wasting energy needlessly. Just look at this specific stage. Three riders went for a stage win. And the one that won it wasted the least amount of energy in the process.

Do you really think so? Is this a stage you will have fond memories of for many years? One that will be long remembered and listed among the most notable? I think you may be misusing the word 'classic'.

Likely this Giro edition will be remembered for a long time yes. All sort of memories involved. It's a GT. The range of memories involved should be wide. I am sure that week three will produce some too.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Imagine what would happen if stage 13 would go on as is. And if there would be either of this things happening. Massive crash, a lot of smaller scale crashes, GC favorite(s) abandoning ... In my opinion then this Giro edition would be effectively over. Compared to now when things settled and we still have a race.

The word 'if' is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. Given the conditions on the GSB, which were as forecasted, there is no more reason to suggest what you say would happen there than anywhere else on the route. So do we circumvent anywhere that might see a crash? Maybe you would enjoy the Giro on Zwift: not for me.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@Armchair cyclist

Making any reference to Zwift here is in my opinion a bit misplaced. But OK.

P.S. One thing i forgot to mention in regards to this stage is to commend the organizer. For filling the holes on the descent from Croix de Coeur with some asphalt. That alone likely prevented a couple of crashes from occurring.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

@Armchair cyclist

Making any reference to Zwift here is in my opinion a bit misplaced. But OK.

P.S. One thing i forgot to mention in regards to this stage is to commend the organizer. For filling the holes on the descent from Croix de Coeur with some asphalt. That alone likely prevented a couple of crashes from occurring.

Ignore the throwaway line about Zwift at the end, then.
You still haven't substantiated any of your fears about doing the first 124 km of this stage.

Given the road conditions on San Bernardino, is your prediction of "Massive crash, a lot of smaller scale crashes, GC favorite(s) abandoning" any more likely to have happened then than at any other point in any other stage? Your justification for cancelling much of the route seems to be based on imagining that the worst that could happen would happen, and would happen in that particular place. If you adopt that mindset, then every kilometre of every road race should be cancelled, because crashes can be imagined anywhere.

Please address that issue.

Yes, there are some roads that would be inherently much more unsafe: that's why we don't see precipitous descents on gravel or ice. But that does not apply to the well maintained surfaces of San Bernardo in clear dry weather, such as was forecasted, and seen, last Friday.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@Armchair cyclist

So i guess you didn't watch this Giro edition? Up to stage 13. It was all fine and dandy. Wasn't it. Anyway. Things settled starting with stage 13. It was the right call. People claiming otherwise. Thomas responded to that rather well. In that interview the day after. Not much else to see here. Move along.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

@Armchair cyclist

So i guess you didn't watch this Giro edition? Up to stage 13. It was all fine and dandy. Wasn't it. Anyway. Things settled starting with stage 13. It was the right call. People claiming otherwise. Thomas responded to that rather well. In that interview the day after. Not much else to see here. Move along.

Thomas' answer totally ducked the issue, as have you.

Simple yes or no, please, to a question I have already put to you:

Given the road conditions on San Bernardino, is your prediction of "Massive crash, a lot of smaller scale crashes, GC favorite(s) abandoning" any more likely to have happened then than at any other point in any other stage?

If your answer is yes, then the reason for your answer will be keenly awaited. If it is no, I assume you will acknowledge that no purpose was served by the cancellation.

 

[Escarabajo]

Thomas' answer totally ducked the issue, as have you.

Simple yes or no, please, to a question I have already put to you:

Given the road conditions on San Bernardino, is your prediction of "Massive crash, a lot of smaller scale crashes, GC favorite(s) abandoning" any more likely to have happened then than at any other point in any other stage?

If your answer is yes, then the reason for your answer will be keenly awaited. If it is no, I assume you will acknowledge that no purpose was served by the cancellation.

The funny think is that the protest was initially for the descent of the Croix de Coeur and they still rode it. That descend was probably as dangerous if not worse than Grand Saint Bernard. Having said that, I would write what Santiago Botero and Victor Hugo Peña both said, it was the accumulation of rain and cold that pushed the riders to the limit. You'll ask the riders and they all will say "No let's not to ride" LOL. It is like asking students if the want a midterm test. They will say no. Legally they had no grounds for cancellation, but it was getting a bit bad with the rain, cold and crashes that made the organization think twice about the change. So it wasn't about the descent, it was about the cumulative conditions. But that was not written anywhere.

 

[houtdffan]

The funny think is that the protest was initially for the descent of the Croix de Coeur and they still rode it. That descend was probably as dangerous if not worse than Grand Saint Bernard. Having said that, I would write what Santiago Botero and Victor Hugo Peña both said, it was the accumulation of rain and cold that pushed the riders to the limit. You'll ask the riders and they all will say "No let's not to ride" LOL. It is like asking students if the want a midterm test. They will say no. Legally they had no grounds for cancellation, but it was getting a bit bad with the rain, cold and crashes that made the organization think twice about the change. So it wasn't about the descent, it was about the cumulative conditions. But that was not written anywhere.

In other words, they just didn't want to ride an old fashioned 6 and a half hour queen Alpine stage

UCI should have told them the stage is going on as scheduled, if the three teams who voted against cancellation are the only 3 teams who show up, the rest will be treated as abandons