86th Tour de Suisse (2.UWT) // June 11th - 18th 2023

[Taxus4a]

I think Ayuso, the new Ocaña, will take this race, with Remco very close.
Surely Uran will do a good ITT, but difficult to beat Wilco

 

[Red Rick]

Wtf your reaction. Evenepoel was one amongst a few others to react in a responsible way. Criticising the organisation while they put the finish immediately after a difficult descent.

Descents have been part of cycling for a hundred years. Complaining about it isn't a beacon of responsibility. I'd say it's neutral.

 

[Ricco']

I just rewatched both the La Punt descent from 2017 (won by freaking Domenico Pozzovivo in the rain) and 2023, and I honestly felt more comfortable watching Pozzo go down in the rain than Ayuso on the dry. It also went with my perception that nowadays riders go in a lower position in order to reduce their body size which looks less controlable than in 2017

 

[Red Rick]

I just rewatched both the La Punt descent from 2017 (won by freaking Domenico Pozzovivo in the rain) and 2023, and I honestly felt more comfortable watching Pozzo go down in the rain than Ayuso on the dry. It also went with my perception that nowadays riders go in a lower position in order to reduce their body size which looks less controlable than in 2017

Super tuck was legal in 2017 though.

Nowadays bikes are a bit more aero, plus there was a tailwind which has quite an effect on descents as well

 

[QueenStagiaire]

So, Evenepoel was wright. I'm convinced organisers will no longer provide arrivals immediately after a difficult, steep and high speed descent. Unfortunately after another avoidable death... and a little bit after the critics of Evenepoel.

Evenepoel was Fred Wright? Oh no, now I think he should never be allowed to race again!

 

[Jagartrott]

Evenepoel was Fred Wright? Oh no, now I think he should never be allowed to race again!

English is not a very logical language, at least phonetically. Right, Wright, rite, write - all pronounced the same. Why?

 

[DNP-Old]

Looking at the women going over the course as we speak, it has Remco written all over it. Figuratively, that is.

 

[Blanco]

Dunno. Maybe the patron and world champion is the first across the line?

If 23 year-old arrogant and egocentric *** is patron of the peloton, then peloton is not in a good place...

 

[Red Rick]

Looking at the women going over the course as we speak, it has Remco written all over it. Figuratively, that is.

Evenepoel who's every single ITT win has been >50 kph average?

 

[DNP-Old]

Evenepoel who's every single ITT win has been >50 kph average?

Yes.

 

[Bolder]

Super tuck was legal in 2017 though.

Nowadays bikes are a bit more aero, plus there was a tailwind which has quite an effect on descents as well

Also, disc brakes increase descending confidence. But they don't necessarily have superior stopping power in every situation.

 

[Extinction]

Wtf your reaction. Evenepoel was one amongst a few others to react in a responsible way. Criticising the organisation while they put the finish immediately after a difficult descent. The descent itself is not the problem (known by most riders competing or training in the area). But having the finish at the end of the descent the organisers forced the attacker (Ayuso), the riders trying to come back for the win, the "general" riders (Bardet, Skjelmose, Gall, Kelderman) who had taken a (small) lead on other GC-riders, the GC-riders (Evenepoel etc.) having lost time in the climb etc., to descent agressively. The choice not to be obliged to take risks, was only theoretically. While Evenepoel didn't take risks (he is not good in descents and he doesn't take risks after his own nearly dead in Lombardia), other did. Result. Two crashes at 100 k/hour. One very lucky, another deceased.
So, Evenepoel was wright. I'm convinced organisers will no longer provide arrivals immediately after a difficult, steep and high speed descent. Unfortunately after another avoidable death... and a little bit after the critics of Evenepoel.

The descent, however, wasn't difficult. Wide roads, dry, good tarmac. It was human error that caused this tragedy, not the race organization or design. Downhill finishes are part of cycling. The braking systems used today, moreover, are superior to those used in the past. Just as dangerous is any descent quickly leading into a finishing climb. Riders will push limits just as hard to seek an advantage. Coming down the Poggio at the end of MSR or the Civiglio in il Lombardia is also high risk descending, etc. I've wondered if nets, like those used in downhill ski racing, could be implemented on such curves with massive drop-offs like the one that sadly proved fatal for Gino? But I don't know if this is feasable.

 

[shadowrider]

I think Evenepoel would have taken seconds at the finish of the stage neutralised after the death of Mader. The stage ended with a 2,5 k climb at 6,5 %. Ideal for Evenepoel (not to long and not to steep) to go full power. Normally, after that stage, Evenepoel would have been again in the race and would still have had a (small) chance to win overall.
With his actual form, Evenepoel can take the stage (or be second after Van Aert. Take 20 or 25 seconds on Skjelmose and a few more on Ayuso. But not more. The latter has won a TT a few weeks ago and is in rising form. You never know he could threaten Skjelmose for the general.

 

[shadowrider]

Descents have been part of cycling for a hundred years. Complaining about it isn't a beacon of responsibility. I'd say it's neutral.

But it is not wise to place the finish just after a rather difficult descent. That's the point. Not the fact that descents are part of cycling.

 

[search]

When talking about his chances for today on Swiss TV, Evenepoel yesterday mentioned that he has a good gap on those guys behind him in GC. So that may implicate that he plans to go a bit harder in the beginning than he usually would, I guess, even if it comes with the risk to pay for it on the climb.

 

[shadowrider]

The descent, however, wasn't difficult. Wide roads, dry, good tarmac. It was human error that caused this tragedy, not the race organization or design. Downhill finishes are part of cycling. The braking systems used today, moreover, are superior to those used in the past. Just as dangerous is any descent quickly leading into a finishing climb. Riders will push limits just as hard to seek an advantage. Coming down the Poggio at the end of MSR or the Civiglio in il Lombadia is also high risk descending, etc. I've wondered if nets, like those used in downhill ski racing, could be implemented on such curves with massive drop-offs like the one that sadly proved fatal for Gino? But I don't know if this is feasable.

This drama again proves that a downhill finish is indeed dangerous. It can be avoided by placing the finish a few kilometers further. Even the riders "union" is gonna propose this. But of course,according to you, the riders themself and the union have no idea what cycling is about. I predict, finishes will no longer take place just after a difficult descent .

 

[KZD]

I think the stage is going to be decided between Remco and Van Aert with a slight advantage to Remco due to the climb.

For the overall, it could go either way, but based on the first TT, I think Skjelmose is going to take it, he would need to lose almost 2 seconds a kilometer on Remco and based on the first TT that doesn't seem likely. Ayuso will probably do a similar time to Skjelmose, so he could fall to third overall but maybe he can pull it off in the second part of the TT.

 

[Red Rick]

But it is not wise to place the finish just after a rather difficult descent. That's the point. Not the fact that descents are part of cycling.

It was not a particularly difficult descent. It isn't very technical, it has good visibility for most of it. The only thing about that descent was that it is very fast. Riders are perfectly capable to mitigate risks on that descent.

This drama again proves that a downhill finish is indeed dangerous. It can be avoided by placing the finish a few kilometers further. Even the riders "union" is gonna propose this. But of course,according to you, the riders themself and the union have no idea what cycling is about. I predict, finishes will no longer take place just after a difficult descent .

If you move the finish further it doesn't change anything. You also cannot make descents never risky because risks are down to rider behavior. Just watch Pidcocks Galibier descent of last year. He was taking what looks to us like big risks, but apparently he found those risks managable. If he had fallen off the mountain would the Galibier descent in the first half of a stage been too dangerous a stage design?

 

[shadowrider]

Evenepoel was Fred Wright? Oh no, now I think he should never be allowed to race again!

Oh, I humbly apologize for this terrible linguistic error. What a stupid and mockable person I am.

Well, English is not my mother tongue. But in addition of my mother tongue I can discuss, oral and written, but not perfect,in four other languages. English, French, German and Spanish. So, five languages in total. And you ? Your reaction is shamefull, and without any relevant content. Especially after what happened

 

[Rackham]

Descents have been part of cycling for a hundred years. Complaining about it isn't a beacon of responsibility. I'd say it's neutral.

I remember just a couple of years ago a recurring debate about descent finishes gravitated around the entertainment factor, not the danger per se. Like after Vingegaard dropped Pogacar on the Ventoux in the 2021 TdF when was subsequently caught on the descent, even the guys on the Move podcast with Armstrong were saying "finish at the top, not after the descent!" only because of the related spectacle implications, not due to safety concerns.

But then in that same Tour there was a really exciting descent battle between Kuss & Valverde in the Pyrenees for a stage win. So what might have seemed true for one stage (the Ventoux) was contradicted later.

And the same goes for safety concerns, i.e. what people think is true after Thursday ("descent finishes are too dangerous") is contradicted by numerous other fatalities in cycling which happened on other parts of a route.

The bottom line is there's danger everywhere in cycling. No, this doesn't mean I advocate 'fatalism' like "what's gonna happen will happen", i.e. because there can always be extra measures taken to mitigate risks like better signalling of dangers ahead & roadside protections, but descent finishes are absolutely part of cycling & navigating Alpine descents in particular (fast, good road surfaces) in the midst of a battle for either the stage or GC is a skill.

Removing that part of the sport would make it a lesser sport.

 

[shadowrider]

It was not a particularly difficult descent. It isn't very technical, it has good visibility for most of it. The only thing about that descent was that it is very fast. Riders are perfectly capable to mitigate risks on that descent.


If you move the finish further it doesn't change anything. You also cannot make descents never risky because risks are down to rider behavior. Just watch Pidcocks Galibier descent of last year. He was taking what looks to us like big risks, but apparently he found those risks managable. If he had fallen off the mountain would the Galibier descent in the first half of a stage been too dangerous a stage design?

That was totally the choice of Pidcock, partly to take some time, partly as a technical showman. But the other riders didn't take those risks on the same downhill. Not even Froome, who, a few years ago, did take risks in the descent of a Tour de France stage, right before the finish. So, your argument is zero.

 

[Nick2413]

This drama again proves that a downhill finish is indeed dangerous. It can be avoided by placing the finish a few kilometers further. Even the riders "union" is gonna propose this. But of course,according to you, the riders themself and the union have no idea what cycling is about. I predict, finishes will no longer take place just after a difficult descent .

Crashes don’t only happen on the final descent of a race and tons of descents are ridden hard for all sorts of reasons. This case also didn’t involve someone going for GC or the win. With your logic you’ll next be asking for all descents to be neutralized, all rainy stages to be cancelled, and auto braking mechanisms when speed goes above 60kph. I don’t see why not if the goal is to remove all things that are not “completely” necessary.

 

[Red Rick]

That was totally the choice of Pidcock, partly to take some time, partly as a technical showman. But the other riders didn't take those risks on the same downhill. Not even Froome, who, a few years ago, did take risks in the descent of a Tour de France stage, right before the finish. So, your argument is zero.

So descents only dangerous when riders crash? Okay.

 

[Salvarani]

If 23 year-old arrogant and egocentric *** is patron of the peloton, then peloton is not in a good place...

Sign ”O” the Times

 

[Rackham]

That was totally the choice of Pidcock, partly to take some time, partly as a technical showman. But the other riders didn't take those risks on the same downhill. Not even Froome, who, a few years ago, did take risks in the descent of a Tour de France stage, right before the finish. So, your argument is zero.

What you're effectively talking about is reducing cycling to a watts per kilo contest.

The only reason descent finishes are considered dangerous is because of speed & stress factor, yet all bike racing whether downhill or on a flat contains speed & stress, whether it's 5k from the finish or 100k. And this 'stress' relates to how a race unfolds, aka whenever riders are going full gas, basically. This can happen anywhere.

What happened on Thursday was a tragic accident which will have its own perfect storm reasons particular to that crash. But tbh I'm starting to think the campaigning against descent finishes is a little suspect, i.e. like jumping on a bandwagon for whatever ulterior reasons which don't have much to do with safety per se (either virtue signalling or politicking for route designs which suit some riders more over others).

Imagine Milan-San Remo where a watts bombardment on the Poggio decides the winner? Where the descent is nullified? It would be a very sad day for the sport. So let's hope the people in positions of power aren't inclined to take such measures in a knee-jerk reaction after the Tour de Suisse.