"Big boy" is just a naïve kid...

[igamogam]

"Big boy" is just a naïve kid...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/blogs/tejay-van-garderen/a-big-boy-schedule-for-2011

I can't believe Tejay Van Garderen actually thinks the radio ban is being introduced by some clueless bureaucrats who have never raced just to make his and his peers life difficult. Has he never thought about how and why people become officials for cycling? Engage grey matter mate...

The truth is that like most of his current generation Van Garderen either has forgotten how or never had to race without a radio. Isn't it Tejay's job to think and look out for his team-mates and to possibly LOOK at the break that is going up the road (or at least ask his team mates) to find out if a GC threat is in there?

Race radios diminish the racing and for certain riders, reduces their chances of winning because they race by being strong willed, clever and using a little or bluff. Letting the managers move their "pieces" using radios removes a huge element of chance or brinkmanship and it is unfair to riders who can actually think for themselves.

By all means give riders radios linked to a commissaires/safety channel but not to the managers. Lets go back to racing where the riders use their own braincells not their somebody else's.

 

[hrotha]

I don't think this is a black and white issue and it's not fair to dismiss someone's opinion just because they're against the radio ban. Especially when most pro riders seem to be for radios.

 

[Bike Boy]

I don't no if radio ban will be good or bad, but I do no that Tejay aren't alone with his opinion.
I don't think it will ever happen

 

[igamogam]

Opinion

I don't think this is a black and white issue and it's not fair to dismiss someone's opinion just because they're against the radio ban. Especially when most pro riders seem to be for radios.

Opinion is one thing... His idea that the folk that write the rules don't know what it is like to hear a crash behind them or get back to the race after a puncture is just plain daft. Just look at the racing background of some of the people on the board of the UCI. That's not opinion it's basic lack of research and ignorance.

I can see why riders and managers want to keep radios, especially those who have never raced without them. It must be scary - the thought of working without the comforter of someone who has an overview of the race progress telling you what to do with no effort. For the managers it would mean a big reduction in their control and damage-limitation abilities but it would also mean a huge reduction in "back-room" deals and the quick phone call to your pal-manager to rein in their riders to pay back a favour.

Personally I'd hate to go back to not using a computer to do my job. It used to be slow, messy, inconvenient and frustrating work but my job is not providing entertainment - it IS for pro bike riders. To put it simply some rules in sport are there just to make it more thrilling and unpredictable - like pit-stops in F1 and bunkers in golf, returning to radio-less racing is a perfect example of one of those rules.

The safety concerns are a non-issue (there are several other ways of dealing with those) - it's all about opening up the racing and giving more riders a chance of winning by skill and not being über-controlled domestiques and highly targeted sprinter-delivery systems. Of course it would also mean that talented riders would also loose through mistakes and stupidity despite being the strongest - but to be frank, I'm all for the underdog having their day once in a while.

I suspect the likes of Mark Cavendish and Andy Schleck would do almost as well without their radios but I'm not sure about some of their opponents.

 

[igamogam]

Rules

I don't no if radio ban will be good or bad, but I do no that Tejay aren't alone with his opinion.
I don't think it will ever happen

If the UCI really want this to happen it will, it's just another rule like the ones on aero positions, feed-stations and age categories.

Unless the riders and managers can show there is a clear safety concern they don't really have much leverage to stop it happening. The teams/riders could stage strikes but how stupid would that make them look?

Remember some riders WANT a radio ban because they feel they can't win against the radios.

 

[Francois the Postman]

All the reasons TvG mentions are awareness issues. Not one single safety issue.

He hates to be "unfairly" surprised and a bit more "stressed"? Sorry mate, I love to see that back again.

He only emphasises why I think a lack of radios benefits the race. Radios introduce instant awareness for all race developments, and pawns can be summoned to a task regardless how race-aware they are, or made themselves through race positioning or internal riders communication.

You make teams and riders that are less able to keep this oversight through insight and on-the-road organisation just as efficient. In a sport where the individual is up against the organisation potential of all, that stifles surprise and the effectiveness of riders who do have an edge.

It's like kitting out football players with radios, so a manager high on the stand can alert them to a gap in the defence. Having that capacity on the field is the sort of oversight and insight that makes or breaks a star footballer. It is what makes the difference between a clever win and yet another stalemate draw.

If you start to lift mediocrity to excellence, you kill competition and excitement.

Riders who are used to them, yeah, I can see why you wouldn't like to be riding "a bit more in the dark". Thanks for confirming that what worries you most of all TvG, is getting caught out.

And stress is yet another element that one rider will handle better and will cause another rider to make critical mistake. Another natural difference in abilities that should separate the winners from losers.

Bring that back on!

 

[Bike Boy]

If the UCI really want this to happen it will, it's just another rule like the ones on aero positions, feed-stations and age categories.

Unless the riders and managers can show there is a clear safety concern they don't really have much leverage to stop it happening. The teams/riders could stage strikes but how stupid would that make them look?

Remember some riders WANT a radio ban because they feel they can't win against the radios.

I wouldn't mind. but I remain sceptical regarding if it will ever happen!

 

[igamogam]

Total agreement.

All the reasons TvG mentions are awareness issues. Not one single safety issue....

...Bring that back on!

With you all the way.

 

[Roland Rat]

I've altered my stance on radios recently. I was against them entirely, but I do agree with some DS's when they point out it makes punctures etc easier and quicker to resolve.

I'm now in favour of keeping radios, but one-way only for DS's. Have a centralised neutral service feed for road hazards and mechanicals, etc. And have a two-way system for the riders. The team can then be organised by the road captain, and the race is then back in the hands of the cyclists to make decisions on the road, as it should be.

Oh, and TJVG, cycling existed before 1995 you know.

 

[igamogam]

different heads

I'm now in favour of keeping radios, but one-way only for DS's. Have a centralised neutral service feed for road hazards and mechanicals, etc. And have a two-way system for the riders. The team can then be organised by the road captain, and the race is then back in the hands of the cyclists to make decisions on the road, as it should be.

The problem with your proposed solution is that the same sort of thing would happen but a different person would be in control. Good captains would just replace good DSs and level the playing field as Francois the Postman points out.

Riders should think for themselves, not be thunked for.

 

[The Hitch]

All the reasons TvG mentions are awareness issues. Not one single safety issue.

He hates to be "unfairly" surprised and a bit more "stressed"? Sorry mate, I love to see that back again.

He only emphasises why I think a lack of radios benefits the race. Radios introduce instant awareness for all race developments, and pawns can be summoned to a task regardless how race-aware they are, or made themselves through race positioning or internal riders communication.

You make teams and riders that are less able to keep this oversight through insight and on-the-road organisation just as efficient. In a sport where the individual is up against the organisation potential of all, that stifles surprise and the effectiveness of riders who do have an edge.

It's like kitting out football players with radios, so a manager high on the stand can alert them to a gap in the defence. Having that capacity on the field is the sort of oversight and insight that makes or breaks a star footballer. It is what makes the difference between a clever win and yet another stalemate draw.

If you start to lift mediocrity to excellence, you kill competition and excitement.

Riders who are used to them, yeah, I can see why you wouldn't like to be riding "a bit more in the dark". Thanks for confirming that what worries you most of all TvG, is getting caught out.

And stress is yet another element that one rider will handle better and will cause another rider to make critical mistake. Another natural difference in abilities that should separate the winners from losers.

Bring that back on!

Good post Francois. I agree with you. A few little details i dont get though

Calling riders back from a break to help. Does that tactic now become impossible, or will ds's simply ride up to said rider and tell him. How though do you communicate to a rider that you want him to drop back to talk, and how does a rider communicate that he has a puncture. Maybe they should be given a red button of some sort that indicates that rider has a puncture but doesnt let the ds communicate anything back.

 

[igamogam]

Calling riders back from a break to help. Does that tactic now become impossible, or will ds's simply ride up to said rider and tell him. How though do you communicate to a rider that you want him to drop back to talk, and how does a rider communicate that he has a puncture. Maybe they should be given a red button of some sort that indicates that rider has a puncture but doesnt let the ds communicate anything back.

The riders should be looking after their designated leader anyway, if they can't find him they can assume they should start looking for him and/or perhaps stop soon.

If a DS wants to talk to a rider he asks the commissaires for permission then when/if he gets it he moves up to the back of the group and usually the rider concerned gets told the DS wants to talk to him by the other riders or in a break the team car moves alongside.

No button needed for punctures. When a rider has a flat he naturally ends up going out of the back of the group and in to the convoy where (if the DS and mechanic are not asleep) he will get service. The commissaires (in front of the team cars) tell the teams that their riders have a problem and is dropping back so it doesn't take much longer than with a radio.

 

[The Falcon]

With you all the way.

As am I Francois, great post