Bonus Seconds in Grand Tours

[tobydawq]

It's called diving in English.

Is that something they taught you in the brutto troupe?

 

[RedheadDane]

Is that something they taught you in the brutto troupe?

I hate you guys!

 

[Sandisfan]

Not a GT, but Sagan won the Tour of California over Alaphilippe on Bonus seconds. For what it's worth.

 

[SHAD0W93]

Not a GT, but Sagan won the Tour of California over Alaphilippe on Bonus seconds. For what it's worth.

And GVA won TA over Sagan by the bonus seconds. I’m sure each year there’s week stage races won due to the bonus seconds. I think Contador has won and lost some of them due to there either being or not being bonus seconds.

 

[Red Rick]

Roglic won Tirreno on bonus seconds this year.

 

[Finn84]

I'm unsure about whether bonus seconds should be applied (especially when a positive drug test can potentially change the order like in the 2013 Tour of Turkey).

I think bonus seconds should always stay as they were originally given.

For the poll, I think the most sensible is the current allocation at the finish and 3-2-1 in intermediate sprint.

 

[Netserk]

I'm interested in hearing from those who would like bonus seconds on top of (some) climbs (@Pantani_lives @IndianCyclist @SHAD0W93 @burning @tobydawq @Gigs_98 @Sandisfan @Earns1985) if they prefer how it is in the Tour or the Vuelta, or whether they would like a different system.

 

[tobydawq]

I'm interested in hearing from those who would like bonus seconds on top of (some) climbs (@Pantani_lives @IndianCyclist @SHAD0W93 @burning @tobydawq @Gigs_98 @Sandisfan @Earns1985) if they prefer how it is in the Tour or the Vuelta, or whether they would like a different system.

There are bonus seconds on top of climbs in the Vuelta? Have I not been paying attention?

I think what they do in the Tour is fine, the only thing I want changed regarding bonus seconds is the distribution of the top 3 so the difference between placings gradually diminishes.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Does anyone know what the origin of the strange 10-6-4 was, when it first came in, or what the rationale was? It certainly seem anomalous that the gap from 2nd to 3rd is less that 3rd to 4th, and that 3rd to 4th is equal to 1st to 2nd:.

I would guess some kind of thinking that "Being on the podium matters more than which minor step on the podium you occupy". That argument might hold more water if there actually were a 3 rider stage podium, but if they ever happen in stage races they are very rare.

 

[Netserk]

1985:
"There were two ways to gain time bonuses, which subtracted seconds from a rider's overall time. One was at stage finishes, where the first three riders across the line received 30, 20, and 10 seconds bonus respectively. The split stage 18 awarded full-time bonuses for each of its two legs.[43] Secondly, riders were able to gain 10, 6, and 3 seconds bonus for the first three to cross the line at intermediate sprints. Unlike the previous year, where these were only given out during flat stages, the time bonuses at intermediate sprints were awarded during every road stage of the 1985 Tour.[44]"

1986:
"No time bonuses were given at stage finishes, a change from the 1985 edition.[120] Time bonuses were given for the intermediate sprints. Over the first half of the race, each intermediate sprint gave 12, 8, and 4 bonus seconds to the first three riders across the line, while during the second half, 6, 4, and 2 seconds were awarded.[121]"

In 1989, there was 6-4-2 at each intermediate sprint ("catch" sprints) on the first 8 stages, no bonus seconds at the finish-line.

1990:
"Time bonuses were distributed to the first three finishers of each stage that was not a mountain stage or a time trial. The winner received a 20-second time bonus, with 12 seconds for second and eight seconds for third place respectively.[125] These bonuses were reduced to 12, 8, and 4 seconds on stage 1, since two stages were held on the same day.[126] In addition, time bonuses could be won at intermediate sprints during the first half of the race. The first three riders across the line were granted a bonus of 6, 4, and 2 seconds respectively.[127]"

 

[tobydawq]

In 1989, there was 6-4-2 at each intermediate sprint ("catch" sprints) on the first 8 stages, no bonus seconds at the finish-line.

In 1990, there was 20-12-8 at the finish-line of non-mountain stages and 6-4-2 at each intermediate sprint in some of the stages.

Okay, but that was not the birthplace of bonus seconds. They reach far back, also in the form of bonus minutes.

 

[Netserk]

Okay, but that was not the birthplace of bonus seconds. They reach far back, also in the form of bonus minutes.

No, but 10-6-4 is half of 20-12-8. The question was about the origin of that particular distribution:

Does anyone know what the origin of the strange 10-6-4 was, when it first came in, or what the rationale was?

---

It seems that 20-12-8 was introduced in the 1990 Tour and kept until 2007. Then from 2008 until 2014 the race was without bonus seconds. They where re-introduced in 2015, from then on half the size, so 10-6-4.

 

[Red Rick]

Vuelta had 20-12-8 until 2011, then 12-8-4 for a while before going to 10-6-4?

 

[fmk_RoI]

Okay, but that was not the birthplace of bonus seconds. They reach far back, also in the form of bonus minutes.

They were used in the Tour in the 1930s, at stage finishes and on mountain tops.

You could argue the stage finish bonus goes back to the 1905 Tour, when the race switched to points and where you finished on each stage mattered, not elapsed time (meaning riders won the Tour (and later the Giro) even though others had completed the course quicker.

 

[Netserk]

While I remembered that it was announced that the bonus seconds of the 2015 Tour would only apply in the first week (https://velo.outsideonline.com/road...s-time-bonuses-reshuffles-points-competition/), I forgot that come the race they would apply throughout the whole race.

 

[SHAD0W93]

I'm interested in hearing from those who would like bonus seconds on top of (some) climbs (@Pantani_lives @IndianCyclist @SHAD0W93 @burning @tobydawq @Gigs_98 @Sandisfan @Earns1985) if they prefer how it is in the Tour or the Vuelta, or whether they would like a different system.

I would have it on every stage that has a KoM point and only one KoM point per stage award the bonus seconds. Which one is selected when there is multiple KoM points throughout the stage I’m not sure, but I think the penultimate climb on stages that finish on a KoM point (unless the penultimate KoM point finish and start of the next climb is like 30-40+ kms distance) and the final KoM point on descent finishes would be the best. That way the KoM bonus points aren’t “doubled up” with the stage finish bonus points.

The bonus points I would have:
Intermediate: 6, 4, 2
4th category: 1
3rd category: 2, 1
2nd category: 5, 3, 1
1st category: 8, 5, 2
Hors category: 10, 6, 2
Stage finish: 15, 10, 5

I think this would be good. It’s a nice, even dispersement and could make those KoM or intermediate points more interesting when the peloton or GC group is the one that reaches the point first instead of everyone just riding through. You can’t make every point have bonus seconds, otherwise it just becomes a convoluted mess. Everyone knows where the bonus seconds are located and they’re not too much to be completely overwhelming but if there are two riders at a similar level and time, it will stop them from rolling across the finish hand in hand. With the bonus seconds before the descent finish, it could lead to an attacking rider trying to gain more time, but should be neutralized for weather conditions.

 

[Unchained]

Does anyone know what the origin of the strange 10-6-4 was, when it first came in, or what the rationale was? It certainly seem anomalous that the gap from 2nd to 3rd is less that 3rd to 4th, and that 3rd to 4th is equal to 1st to 2nd:.

I would guess some kind of thinking that "Being on the podium matters more than which minor step on the podium you occupy". That argument might hold more water if there actually were a 3 rider stage podium, but if they ever happen in stage races they are very rare.

In track racing they would often offer these numbers and 10-6-4 is often enough to put someone back in contention that made early mistakes. I personally struggled with getting destroyed in final sprints and in American crit racing would sprint as a spoiler for time bonuses or for dinner for 2, something shiny because I know I am not getting anything in the final.. I have made $100 bucks from a crowd prime and it's more than 3rd,4th or 5th place prize money.

 

[Pantani_lives]

I'm interested in hearing from those who would like bonus seconds on top of (some) climbs (@Pantani_lives @IndianCyclist @SHAD0W93 @burning @tobydawq @Gigs_98 @Sandisfan @Earns1985) if they prefer how it is in the Tour or the Vuelta, or whether they would like a different system.

I didn't give it that much thought, but I quite liked the uphill sprints in the Tour - as long as no motors got in the way. It gives some extra suspense in the mountain stages, and a motivation to catch the break.

 

[Wyndbrook]

Scap them, Kasia has just lost second in the tour on bonus seconds.

 

[Gigs_98]

I'm interested in hearing from those who would like bonus seconds on top of (some) climbs (@Pantani_lives @IndianCyclist @SHAD0W93 @burning @tobydawq @Gigs_98 @Sandisfan @Earns1985) if they prefer how it is in the Tour or the Vuelta, or whether they would like a different system.

I didn't think of it too much but I mostly thought of strategically placed bonus seconds, whether those are awarded on climbs or not doesn't really matter to me. The Benelux Tour used to have the golden kilometre (or does it still have that?) which I always really enjoyed. I'd like gts to play around with things like that. I feel like if you have bonus seconds already you might as well use them to generate some exciting moments.

What my vote really didn't mean was an approvement of how the Tour did this. It sometimes felt like bonus seconds became the sole purpose of a climb which was easily hard enough to be relevant on its own. I don't want riders to not attack because they want to be in the best possible position for the bonus sprint.

But then, if we had bonus seconds on an easy 5% hill with 25 km to go where we'd otherwise never see gc action, I wouldn't complain. Maybe it leads to a split in the peloton, maybe it reveals the bad day of a gc contender. It would simply be another variable thrown into the mix.

 

[Red Rick]

I didn't think of it too much but I mostly thought of strategically placed bonus seconds, whether those are awarded on climbs or not doesn't really matter to me. The Benelux Tour used to have the golden kilometre (or does it still have that?) which I always really enjoyed. I'd like gts to play around with things like that. I feel like if you have bonus seconds already you might as well use them to generate some exciting moments.

What my vote really didn't mean was an approvement of how the Tour did this. It sometimes felt like bonus seconds became the sole purpose of a climb which was easily hard enough to be relevant on its own. I don't want riders to not attack because they want to be in the best possible position for the bonus sprint.

But then, if we had bonus seconds on an easy 5% hill with 25 km to go where we'd otherwise never see gc action, I wouldn't complain. Maybe it leads to a split in the peloton, maybe it reveals the bad day of a gc contender. It would simply be another variable thrown into the mix.

Nobody gets dropped on an easy 5% hill at 25km to go. And teams aren't super keen to chase all day for a few seconds with no stage win on offer, though we saw it more in Paris-Nice. I only think it works okay on a stage like Jaizkibel, but that's also because it favored one favorite so heavily over the other. On the other hand, it definitely made Joux Plane worse.

 

[Finn84]

I think 10-6-4 was commonplace in shorter stage races at the same time when GTs had 20-12-8.

 

[fbjim]

The relation to crashes with the 3K rule has nothing to do with "moral hazard" of people's GC times not mattering if there's a crash in the last 3K. It happened because by 2015 or so, it had become normal for GC teams to run their own leadout trains to compete with the sprint leadout trains until the 3K banner, which is a major issue on narrow road run-ins.

 

[Peter von]

I like bonus seconds on the finish line because in the first week we have riders that might gain a yellow jersey from them and that's nice.
I think it's weird when they have them on top of climbs and I think it looks amateurish when they have a "B" printed on all the official stage profiles, but then remove the bonus seconds because last minute someone at ASO realized it might be weird if number 2 on stage 1(no prologue) got to wear the yellow jersey.

We never know if they actually encourage attacks or not. the routes doesn't stay the same.

On the 3k rule.. I just don't think it works when you can still loose time to a non-crash related split and 3 k is still so close to the finish that they front is getting very hectic, so teams need to stay in front regardless of the rule and they need to stay there because otherwise they can loose 20 seconds. The GC trains and sprinters trains compete and 3k is too short to untangle it all and because of the high speed at the time it's super dangerous if GC riders and their teams just stops pedaling with 3k to go.
A big problem is that the dangerous bit of the peloton is the big chunk in the middle, so GC riders don't want to go there having just killed two team mates to be in the top 20, so they kill another to stay in the front.
Solely for safety reasons it might(emphasis on might!) work if they did the 5k rule and the time is just taken there on sprint stages, because the GC riders can then take it easy and the sprint trains have more time to overtake the GC trains in a safe manner while the GC teams are dropping down to safety. And in time potentially it would cause the GC teams to be much more relaxed and leave the sprinting to the sprinters and their teams, which is what is really needed if we are to reduce crashes.

But that just makes it weird. I can imagine a crosswind stage where it's super hectic, but then the GC teams just stops chasing with 5 k to go and all of a sudden the two sprinters and their 5 team mates are the only ones working. Or maybe big team attacks with 6-7 k to go doing TTT and gaining 20 seconds for their leaders. So yeah I don't know what to do. Or some of those sprint stages with a small hill where Nibali liked to attack. All of a sudden he just stops because he was only in it for the gain on 5 k line.
Maybe sprint stages needs a loop where they can race an extra 5-10 k for the stage win but the remaining riders can finish after the line?
-but that is also dangerous if some of the riders that want to stop are in front of a sprinter racing to get back to the front after a puncture. and also means different riders have done different distances, so yeah that needs some work as well.

It doesn't sit well with my idea of a race. But then again the sport is a much different beast than it was 120 years ago, so change happens and is sometimes needed.

 

[fbjim]

On a pure sprint day I wouldn't be opposed to something like 10K even, because that's enough time for the GC teams to relax and let the sprint leadouts work the rest of the day. As far as racing goes, when there's a peloton split on a flat day, it usually happens well before the 10K mark.

I also think the 3 second rule (3 second gap for S.T. on flat days) has been an underrated boon to safety in the last decade or so.