• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Bring back the time bonuses!

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jun 10, 2009
606
0
0
Visit site
online-rider said:
What ClashBo2 is saying is that, a sprinter who is good enough to win 2 stages in the first four days or or four 2nd places in the first week (or whatever) probably merits the yellow jersey as being the best rider at that stage of the race. And thats incontestable.....If M. Cavendish wins four stages while while F. Cancellara has only won one, after 5 days of racing then don't you think Cavendish should have the jersey?

Anyone who remembers it will agree, the TdF was alot more exciting 5 or 6 years ago when the sprinters could duel for Yellow in the first week.

Then in the second week you could scrap the bonifications, why not?

The sprinters go all-out for the wins anyway, and get the credit of winning the stage. I don't see why sprinters should get the MJ as well as stage wins and the green jersey by rigging the actual time with bonifications.

Cav may win the more stages, but are you honestly suggesting this makes him more worthy of the MJ than Canc? In any test of greater than 2km, Canc would eat Cav on toast!

The tour being more exciting years ago was nothing to do with time bonuses.
 
May 29, 2010
17
0
0
Visit site
guncha said:
Real time only. What is the point to give extra 20 seconds to a rider who has the same time at the finish?

some of you guys are completely missing my point...especially about the early sprint stages.

Example: Cancellara wins a short prologue by 4 seconds over Cavendish. If Cav wins the next 2 stages, and Cancellara finishes in the peloton at the official same time, Cav should be in yellow. We all know that same time in bike races can be far different from actual time, especially if Cancellara finishes 40th in the peloton. Obviously you have to give a "same time" designation to everyone in the peloton to prevent massive chaos in people trying to cross before everyone else, but you can reward the person who actually raced to the line by giving a 6, 4, 2 second bonus for top 3.
 
Oct 18, 2009
456
0
0
Visit site
dsut4392 said:
The sprinters go all-out for the wins anyway, and get the credit of winning the stage. I don't see why sprinters should get the MJ as well as stage wins and the green jersey by rigging the actual time with bonifications.

Cav may win the more stages, but are you honestly suggesting this makes him more worthy of the MJ than Canc? In any test of greater than 2km, Canc would eat Cav on toast!

The tour being more exciting years ago was nothing to do with time bonuses.

I totally disagree with that. Do you remember when Rubens Bertogliati attacked under the redkite some years ago and won by about 5 metres on Stage 1 ? - Thanks to the time-bonus he took the MJ by a very few seconds. And it changed hands, I don't know exactly, but very soon on to someone else (sprinter), and someone else (another sprinter) before the TTT where it changed hands again.
What I'm saying is that is very exciting....
Why should Cancellara hold on to the MJ for a week just because he won the Prologue - I think that's a boring approach. I mean you're right the Maillot Jaune should go to the allround GC rider I don't dispute that the organisers have the opportunity here to give the notable jersey of the tour - the big publicity jersey - To the rider/teams who are really Hotting Up the Race at that point in time. Then you wont have this stupid - I want to gouge out my eyes with pokers - situation where the MJ sits in the bunch for an entire week doing absolutely Fu6K all for the publicity of the race.
Does anybody get my point or am I talking to myself?
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
sherer said:
true but if we had time bonues we might have seen AC attack more in earlier stages, pull out a minute and then all he would need is to finish with AS on the other stages

Yes, but you can bet he'd race to the line to avoid Andy picking up an additional 5-10 seconds for finishing at the same time. That minute would start getting eaten away if he didn't try to actually beat Andy to the tape. And Saxo would be making sure all the mountain stages had a race to the tape... so Andy could try to get that time. Less breakaway success... more GC guys trying to actually win the stages.
 
Oct 18, 2009
456
0
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
Yes, but you can bet he'd race to the line to avoid Andy picking up an additional 5-10 seconds for finishing at the same time. That minute would start getting eaten away if he didn't try to actually beat Andy to the tape. And Saxo would be making sure all the mountain stages had a race to the tape... so Andy could try to get that time. Less breakaway success... more GC guys trying to actually win the stages.

I think thats a recipe for success. Its time they did something to make the Grand Tours more interesting. In the Armstrong era he'd base his whole season around 2 accelerations in the pyrenees (or Alps), and Contador is hardly much braver. Your idea would really force them to shake their sh*t up. I'm surprised Christian Prudhomme hasn't realised this - I guess he's too Prudent.

:D
 
Oct 18, 2009
456
0
0
Visit site
powerste said:
Well this is an online forum after all. I never assume I'm actually reaching anyone else :p

I think thats the best attitude to have :D I made one post on another thread just now and they all left :eek:. I think I must have some kind of disease lol.
 
Jun 15, 2009
353
0
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
Yes, but you can bet he'd race to the line to avoid Andy picking up an additional 5-10 seconds for finishing at the same time. That minute would start getting eaten away if he didn't try to actually beat Andy to the tape. And Saxo would be making sure all the mountain stages had a race to the tape... so Andy could try to get that time. Less breakaway success... more GC guys trying to actually win the stages.

...and more stage winners seeing GC opportunities become real.

I'd love to see 10 sec finishing bonuses, say 10-7-5-3-1, as a way to link stage wins and GC more tightly. I remember enjoying more exciting racing and more frequent jersey-swapping when we still had the bonuses.

Having said that, IMO 20 seconds for the stage win is too much, and the intermediate sprints should remain points-only.
 
Sep 21, 2009
2,978
0
0
Visit site
clashb02 said:
Time bonuses certainly would have made the stage today a lot more interesting. Why'd they do away with them? On other stages it would make someone like Leipheimer actually have to try to do something...at least in the last 50 meters.

I also think that if a sprinter, who is just a couple seconds out of yellow after the prologue, wins the next 2 stages in a bunch sprint, while the yellow jersey finishes at the back in the pack, the sprinter should be in yellow.

They don't have to be 20, 12, 6 second bonuses, but even 6, 4, 2 would make people actually work for the top 3 places instead of sitting on whoever doesn't have a teammate up the road and coasting to the finish. Let's see some racing!

Wrong. They have to be what UCI says.

Regardless of the seconds awarded they can make people work for the top 3 places. Or they can make for breakaways allowed to get to the finish almost every day to avoid GC contenders taking the bonus. Remember the Vuelta 2009?
 
Aug 3, 2009
169
0
0
Visit site
20/12/8 is perfect to me. AC and AS would have been tied and AS might have still had the MJ leaving Pau the other day. I suspect that would have made the Col du Tourmale a bit more interesting, and Contador would have NEVER received any complaints about taking time on Schleck the other day.
 
Jul 18, 2009
202
0
0
Visit site
I'm not sure, even with time bonuses, if Contador would have sat behind AS for 10k up the Tourmalet and nipped out for the last 10m to take the stage. Andy would have rightly killed him given recent history. Maybe Contador would have attacked more but does it really matter whether he's 8 in front or say 2/12 behind with a 52k TT tomorrow.

Bonuses might make the sprinters try in the Prologue tho. Only Farrar seemed to this year. Otherwise they may as well just give the yellow to Cancellara for the first week every year.
 
You can't decide what effect time bonuses would have had on a race by adjusting existing times as if there were bonuses and looking at that outcome. That doesn't work because it does not account for how different the behaviors might have been had their been bonuses.

For example, for the Tourmalet stage you can't just assume that Andy would have gotten the bigger time bonus, because, had their been time bonuses, Alberto might not have gifted him the stage win.

Without time bonuses the best man wins by the margin actually earned. With time bonuses, especially the intermediate ones, that's distorted, and it's unclear if the time margin accurately reflects differences in ability, and even if the best man wins.

Just say no to time bonuses.
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
Dekker_Tifosi said:
Wheel sucking doesn't help you anything uphill.

Really? Then why all the hate towards riders who don't ride at the front of a group going up a climb? People were saying they'd be mad if Contador won the stage after Andy "did all the work" at the front. Gesink was given credit for "setting the pace" at the front of the chase.

If riding at the front doesn't matter uphill... then why do people seem to think that it does matter? Why does having Kloden go back to "help" armstrong on Verbier last year matter? Why does Evans not having teammates on the climbs matter?
 
Jul 2, 2009
2,392
0
0
Visit site
The winner should be the guy who did the course in the shortest time. I don't think time bonuses make that much difference to the racing. Riders still want to win stages. Contador didn't sprint because he's too cosy with Schleck and he was trying to redeem himself in the eyes of some.

The bonuses were abolished after the 2007 Tour, and with good reason. In that Tour Contador beat Evans by 23 seconds - 20 of which were for bonuses. This was also a race in which Rasmussen was withdrawn and Vino was kicked out. I think the organisers could forsee a situation where a positive test, verified after the Tour, might re-jig the bonuses and even change the winner (despite 1st and 2nd not being involved).

I'd support bonuses for the first week though, as it's a bit of a Cancellara testimonial each year at the moment.
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
Ninety5rpm said:
You can't decide what effect time bonuses would have had on a race by adjusting existing times as if there were bonuses and looking at that outcome. That doesn't work because it does not account for how different the behaviors might have been had their been bonuses.

For example, for the Tourmalet stage you can't just assume that Andy would have gotten the bigger time bonus, because, had their been time bonuses, Alberto might not have gifted him the stage win.

Without time bonuses the best man wins by the margin actually earned. With time bonuses, especially the intermediate ones, that's distorted, and it's unclear if the time margin accurately reflects differences in ability, and even if the best man wins.

Just say no to time bonuses.

But that's the point.

We WANT the behaviors to change. I want to ENCOURAGE racing for the win. Their behaviors now... with "gifting" stages NEEDS TO CHANGE.

In the end... I think bonus seconds will lead to less "soft pedaling". A dangerous rider only a few seconds back after the prologue might go on a break for intermediate sprints, while the sprinters/leader will chase. Less soft pedaling. A sprinter might go all out on a prologue to have a shot at taking the yellow in the first week. Less soft pedaling. A GC contender is going to sprint for the line in a close tour for bonus seconds. Less soft pedaling. A GC rider with a good kick might fight to bring back a break so he can try for bonus seconds to close a gap against a better TT rider. Less softpedaling.

I can't see how that outcome will be bad.
 
kurtinsc said:
Really? Then why all the hate towards riders who don't ride at the front of a group going up a climb? People were saying they'd be mad if Contador won the stage after Andy "did all the work" at the front. Gesink was given credit for "setting the pace" at the front of the chase.

If riding at the front doesn't matter uphill... then why do people seem to think that it does matter? Why does having Kloden go back to "help" armstrong on Verbier last year matter? Why does Evans not having teammates on the climbs matter?
Because somebody has to do it. And people who lose morale need teammates with them.

But really, physically, the advantage in wheel sucking uphill is minimal at best.
If you have ever been on a racebike in that situation yourself, you'd know

Obviously, you have not?
 
Jul 2, 2009
2,392
0
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
But that's the point.
Their behaviors now... with "gifting" stages NEEDS TO CHANGE.

How many 'gifts' have you actually seen in the Tour, though. I can think of three in the last decade (other than between teammates - e.g Cobo-Piepoli).

Armstrong - Pantani (2000)
Armstrong - Basso (2004)
Contador - Schleck (2010)

At a push: Contador - Schlecks (2009) - but he was outnumbered there.


(PS I'm no Armstrong fanboy, in case that's the route some of you want to take this. It's just the way it is)
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
Mambo95 said:
The winner should be the guy who did the course in the shortest time. I don't think time bonuses make that much difference to the racing. Riders still want to win stages. Contador didn't sprint because he's too cosy with Schleck and he was trying to redeem himself in the eyes of some.

The bonuses were abolished after the 2007 Tour, and with good reason. In that Tour Contador beat Evans by 23 seconds - 20 of which were for bonuses. This was also a race in which Rasmussen was withdrawn and Vino was kicked out. I think the organisers could forsee a situation where a positive test, verified after the Tour, might re-jig the bonuses and even change the winner (despite 1st and 2nd not being involved).

I'd support bonuses for the first week though, as it's a bit of a Cancellara testimonial each year at the moment.

I don't think GC riders care nearly as much about winning a stage... not if time doesn't come with that. Last year on Grand Bornand, Contador was willing to give away a stage win to get the Schlecks to help him put time into everyone else. This year he was willing to give Andy the last mountain win to gain time on Menchov (and to redeem his attacking when Andy was stopped with a mechanical). Would he still make those deals if it meant giving away 8-14 seconds in the GC. I don't believe he would... they might still decide to work together, but they'd sprint for the bonus seconds.

I HATE, HATE, HATE "gifting" a stage. Just annoys the heck out of me.
 

TRENDING THREADS