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

[peterfin]

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

Some must have nightmares of a certain 23 year-old. Good that there is a forum like this to release that negative energy.

 

[search]

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.

I think fatigue is actually the main risk. No idea if this was the case with Mäder, but riders who go deep into the red zone on a climb obviously struggle more to focus on a following descent. This is less often the case in other race situations.

We've seen this with Ghebreigzabhier in Catalunya last year, for example, who attacked on the Montjuic, looked completely done at the top, and then crashed straight into a tree at high speed.

 

[yaco]

You don't need a descent finish on a multi-mountain finish - Thursday was a multi-mountain finish.

 

[Netserk]

I think fatigue is actually the main risk. No idea if this was the case with Mäder, but riders who go deep into the red zone on a climb obviously struggle more to focus on a following descent. This is less often the case in other race situations.

We've seen this with Ghebreigzabhier in Catalunya last year, for example, who attacked on the Montjuic, looked completely done at the top, and then crashed straight into a tree at high speed.

Fatigue makes it more difficult to concentrate and properly assess the risks, but you don't need fatigue for that. I think Weylandt likely died because he wasn't focused and then extremely unlucky in what entailed from that.

Similarly with the big peloton crashes. Rarely it's because of fatigue, more often it's a lack of concentration.

 

[Rackham]

I think fatigue is actually the main risk. No idea if this was the case with Mäder, but riders who go deep into the red zone on a climb obviously struggle more to focus on a following descent. This is less often the case in other race situations.

We've seen this with Ghebreigzabhier in Catalunya last year, for example, who attacked on the Montjuic, looked completely done at the top, and then crashed straight into a tree at high speed.

But Ghebreigzabhier's incident (insofar as 'fatigue' is blamed) can be contradicted by Milan Vader's crash in Itzulia last year, i.e. who went over a guardrail on a descent over 100 km from the finish & ended up in a coma.

And that's what we're talking about here, right? i.e. people trying to find a common causation behind crashes in order to create a new set of race conditions & rules which mitigate further crashes. But when digging deeper like this, all we find is the situation leading to one crash is always contradicted by another crash. Often with varying degrees of severity in terms of injuries which don't reflect the speed, violence or location in the race of the crash itself.

Like there was one example in the TdF 3 years ago when Romain Bardet suffered what seemed like a pretty innocuous fall & continued the stage... with what transpired later to be a literal concussion (& brain bleeding which put him in danger) .

So removing descent finishes won't magically make racing safer. But it will ruin part of the sport.

 

[search]

Fatigue makes it more difficult to concentrate and properly assess the risks, but you don't need fatigue for that. I think Weylandt likely died because he wasn't focused and then extremely unlucky in what entailed from that.

Similarly with the big peloton crashes. Rarely it's because of fatigue, more often it's a lack of concentration.

yeah, that's true, but you can't really erase the risk of that, while it's possible to do something about late descents.

Don't get me wrong, I think getting rid of them completely is nonsense, same as Hansen's suggestion to add 3k of flat in the end. But I can see why very fast descents on multi-mountain stages may not be the wisest thing, or if used, need additional protection compared to what we saw this week.

 

[Bonimenier]

But Ghebreigzabhier's incident (insofar as 'fatigue' is blamed) can be contradicted by Milan Vader's crash in Itzulia last year, i.e. who went over a guardrail on a descent over 100 km from the finish & ended up in a coma.

And that's what we're talking about here, right? i.e. people trying to find a common causation behind crashes in order to create a new set of race conditions & rules which mitigate further crashes. But when digging deeper like this, all we find is the situation leading to one crash is always contradicted by another crash. Often with varying degrees of severity in terms of injuries which don't reflect the speed, violence or location in the race of the crash itself.

Like there was one example in the TdF 3 years ago when Romain Bardet suffered what seemed like a pretty innocuous fall & continued the stage... with what transpired later to be a literal concussion (& brain bleeding which put him in danger) .

So removing descent finishes won't magically make racing safer. But it will ruin part of the sport.

It's not because there are crashes not caused by fatigue, that there aren't a fair amount of crashes that are caused by fatigue. One doesn't contradict the other. It's like saying alcohol isn't a problem when driving a car because there are plenty of car crashes where nobody was intoxicated.

 

[Red Rick]

Seriously Hansen suggested adding 3km of flat?

That's like the #1 thing guaranteed to make no difference

 

[Bonimenier]

Seriously Hansen suggested adding 3km of flat?

That's like the #1 thing guaranteed to make no difference

It could have a minor impact since you don't need to be straight on the wheel in the descent to end in the same time since you have a little bit of time to get back after the descent, but I agree the effect would be really minor.

 

[search]

Seriously Hansen suggested adding 3km of flat?

That's like the #1 thing guaranteed to make no difference

he meanwhile deleted his tweets, but they included a poll which supported that idea (3 or 5k, can't remember for certain), and he said that as a rider, he would take less risks when he knew that there was room to make up time again afterwards

 

[Samamba]

Seriously Hansen suggested adding 3km of flat?

That's like the #1 thing guaranteed to make no difference

It was poll with multiple options, 3km, 5km, 8km, just finish right after descent, and most riders said 3km, others 5km. Which indeed would literally make 0 difference. I hate the "put some flat behind a descent" argument, it's complete BS. Either you do like 20km and you just ruin your stage (100% breakaway stage with probably 0 GC action and breakaway guys will still be taking risks on the descent) or you just keep it how it. Well, or you ban descents but yeah...

Just to be clear, I wouldn't mind such a rule, but then for avoiding finished like in Basque country earlier this year (basically sprint finish in the descent), cause it won't do anything in a case like Maders (where we still don't know what happened btw).

It could have a minor impact since you don't need to be straight on the wheel in the descent to end in the same time since you have a little bit of time to get back after the descent, but I agree the effect would be really minor.

This only counts for a small amount of riders who can actually make up ground on the flat, so it would just benefit certain type of riders. Also, if groups just works together you're not making up any ground, no one fighting for a stage win or a GC will think like they can easily make it up after.

 

[Samamba]

It could have a minor impact since you don't need to be straight on the wheel in the descent to end in the same time since you have a little bit of time to get back after the descent, but I agree the effect would be really minor.

This only counts for a small amount of riders who can actually make up ground on the flat, so it would just benefit certain type of riders. Also, if groups just works together you're not making up any ground, no one fighting for a stage win or a GC will think like they can easily make it up after.

 

[Red Rick]

Add flat behind descents, it just makes attacking more pointless and closing the gap more important. Thus making the bad descenders even more desperate to hang on.

 

[search]

It was poll with multiple options, 3km, 5km, 8km, just finish right after descent, and most riders said 3km, others 5km.

closest distance included was 1k, as far as I remember, so it basically only addressed riders which wanted a change to begin with. "It's fine as it is" was not a choice.

 

[Samamba]

closest distance included was 1k, as far as I remember, so it basically only addressed riders which wanted a change to begin with. "It's fine as it is" was not a choice.

Yeah could be, just remember most riders opted for 3km and 5km, which wouldn't change a thing about riders taking risks for GC and stages.

 

[search]

Yeah could be, just remember most riders opted for 3km and 5km, which wouldn't change a thing about riders taking risks for GC and stages.

yeah, completely agree. There were 2.5k of flat after the descent in Slovenia yesterday, for example. I seriously doubt the crash there wouldn't have happened with 500m more.

Can't access the full tweet anymore, but here's the poll it included. and going by Hansen's replies he supported that idea. While Robbie Hunter heavily spoke out against it.

 

[Samamba]

There were 2.5k of flat after the descent in Slovenia yesterday, for example. I seriously doubt the crash there wouldn't have happened with 500m more.

Make it 10 and Zana would've still crashed. Solo riders would probably take more risks because they know they need the gap.

You could for example say that Pena would've taken less risks if there wasn't any flat after the descent, as it was the flat part that could make him loose, so he knew he needed a big enough gap.

 

[Ricco']

What would lead to a more dangerous stage? A unipuerto climb and then descent (as in practice was the La Punt stage, which had the other two mountains in the start with a long valley inbetween) or back to back to back HC mountains with a descent finish (which would lead to more tired legs but also more separation between riders)?

 

[Rackham]

It's not because there are crashes not caused by fatigue, that there aren't a fair amount of crashes that are caused by fatigue. One doesn't contradict the other. It's like saying alcohol isn't a problem when driving a car because there are plenty of car crashes where nobody was intoxicated.

Fatigue is an integral part of cycling though, i.e. unlike your analogy with road accidents caused by alcohol, in pro cycling the ability to descend fast & cleanly when tired is absolutely part of the required skillset of a pro biker rider.

Honestly what happened on Thursday is IMO the cycling equivalent of Anthoine Hubert's crash in Formula 2 at Spa Francorchamps a few years ago, where even the Halo device around the cockpit didn't save him. Sh*t happens.

I get that people feel the need to fix something like that so it never happens again but from what we can gather so far it's just really bad luck & could happen to any rider at any time no matter where they are in a stage.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

It's ofcourse no given that Evenepoel will lose time on the uphill in the ITT, but I do think he's been better at the pan flat ITTs than the hilly ones historically

I think that's really circumstantial. Two of his best TT's were hilly. Algarve 2022 he beat Küng by 58 seconds over 30k. And if it weren't for Dennis who had secluded himself for months to prepare for the 2019 WCC, he would have been worldchampion at the age of 19 on a long an hilly TT.

 

[Barnacle Bill]

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

I was actually looking forward to see Sheffield in this TT, because i think it would have suited him as well. Could have competed for a podium spot on the day maybe. A real shame for him, also after crashing out of the WCC last year.

 

[Me gal in da rain]

I don't think you can make any sport completely safe... the fact that fatalities in pro cycling are so rare is somewhat of a miracle given the incredible speeds and proximity to each other at which they travel..... calling it a miracle probably does a disservice to the organizers and governing bodies and the skills of the riders themselves...

this is an incredibly sad accident but not one that should necessarily have an impact on the way the sport is conducted....

 

[shadowrider]

I have a suggestion about professional cycling. Because all aspects of cycling have to be honoured in professional stage races. That's what some people (Red Rick and others) are writing here. All aspects. So racing on flat, in mountainous area, steep hill, steep descents, in tricky sidewinds, on narrow roads, on cobbles, on gravel, on goat trails. All of them both uphill and downhill..... And of course finishing immediately after a highspeed and tricky descent....

Well, next year, in the Tour. Let's have a stage in the northern cobble region. A not to long and hard stage (it's not Paris-Roubaix, but a stage in a grand tour). The finish line will be drawn 300 meters after the turn to the left, at the end of theTrouée d'Arenberg. On a very wide and safe road. A perfect legitime arrival, if I follow the train of thought of Red Rick and co...... Case closed.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Tour de Suisse - 8 - St. Gallen – Abtwil SG | Tissot Timing

Tissot Timing

www.tissottiming.com

for the moment, for me at least, the regular times and intermediate time page is not working, but the general live page is.