Tour de Pologne will use Boplan's barriers and markers, the ones used in several Flemish races, this year. An edition too late, but at least they are trying to make their race safer.
Looking for the latest race results? - We got you covered right here!
That's an idea but there will still be crashes from the many riders and teams contesting the stage win. I agree with your point regarding F1. Sadly they still feel the need to effectively ban open cockpit racing but that's another matter!I see this isn't the thread I commented on ages ago, which just goes to show that nothing is done and the same things keep happening.
The easiest option is taking GC times at 10km. This gives you the 3km rule from 13km and loads of distance afterwards to get the sprinters into town in a reduced bunch. Yes, it'll take some adjustment and yes, it'll feel weird, but I'm not sure what other options there really are. The current 3km rule is reactive and I personally feel this is a very poor way to manage crashes.
Comparison to F1 is always a bad idea, because we accept that riders get bumped around and lose control of their bikes without being punished. There's no way to unpick every crash and try and work out who was at fault, especially as cameras don't pick up a lot of it. In motor racing it's much easier to assess and punish dangerous driving/riding etc.
It'll be impossible to remove crashes completely and I don't think sprinters going down at the very end is most people's biggest issue, although I don't think anyone wants riders to get injured. Ewan went down through loss of control/touch of wheels/whatever that had nothing to do with the route and that's always going to be a risk. Unless they decide to ban people they can determine caused a crash, whether it's judged an accident or not, riders will push the limits to try and win.That's an idea but there will still be crashes from the many riders and teams contesting the stage win. I agree with your point regarding F1. Sadly they still feel the need to effectively ban open cockpit racing but that's another matter!
I see this isn't the thread I commented on ages ago, which just goes to show that nothing is done and the same things keep happening.
The easiest option is taking GC times at 10km. This gives you the 3km rule from 13km and loads of distance afterwards to get the sprinters into town in a reduced bunch. Yes, it'll take some adjustment and yes, it'll feel weird, but I'm not sure what other options there really are. The current 3km rule is reactive and I personally feel this is a very poor way to manage crashes.
Comparison to F1 is always a bad idea, because we accept that riders get bumped around and lose control of their bikes without being punished. There's no way to unpick every crash and try and work out who was at fault, especially as cameras don't pick up a lot of it. In motor racing it's much easier to assess and punish dangerous driving/riding etc.
The best thing people can do about this is to stop blaming
- the UCI
- the organizers
- the roundabouts
- the descends
- the sharp bends
- the spectators
- the signs
- the holes in the road
- the branches from trees
- the bottles
- the wind
- um, and did I forget to mention the UCI?
It'll be impossible to remove crashes completely and I don't think sprinters going down at the very end is most people's biggest issue, although I don't think anyone wants riders to get injured. Ewan went down through loss of control/touch of wheels/whatever that had nothing to do with the route and that's always going to be a risk. Unless they decide to ban people they can determine caused a crash, whether it's judged an accident or not, riders will push the limits to try and win.
The biggest problem most people seem to have with crashes on these types of stages is affects the GC race, because GC riders are forced to mix it at the front of the peloton with the sprint trains, or risk losing time by getting stuck behind a crash, gaps happening at the finish etc. The 3km rule is supposed to help here, and it does, but it only applies if there is a crash, so the GC riders still have to be there in the mix. This means that crashes are more likely. Taking GC times earlier means that GC riders, and their domestiques, can drift back and let the sprinters and their trains get on with it. There will still be crashes, but they would have a much smaller impact on the race overall and hopefully they'd be reduced as there would be more space on the road. I don't think it'd have much of an effect on the overall racing. People who want to go for yellow can still go for yellow. The break may actually work together more to hit that 10km mark as far ahead of the peloton as they can and you can still give bonus seconds on the sprint line to separate the winner and determine jersey wearers. I honestly think that the impact would be overwhelmingly positive.
I suppose the other option is to keep cutting team sizes. 5-6 riders per team is going to cut the number of riders on the road significantly.
I think banning team radios and only having a neutral race radio would help. It would be less hectic if we didn't have a DS screaming into every riders ear to stay at the front.They are not battling to stay in front of splits happening in the last 3 km (which is a non-issue with the 3''-rule), they are battling to be ahead of crashes happening before 3 km to go, and to not get involved in the crashes in the last 3 km.
As long as they expect crashes to happen and everyone else to battle for position, they too will muscle their way to the front 13 km, 18 km, 25 km before the finish. The problem is the riders/teams.
The best thing people can do about this is to stop blaming
- the UCI
- the organizers
- the roundabouts
- the descends
- the sharp bends
- the spectators
- the signs
- the holes in the road
- the branches from trees
- the bottles
- the wind
- um, and did I forget to mention the UCI?
I wrote:They are not battling to stay in front of splits happening in the last 3 km (which is a non-issue with the 3''-rule), they are battling to be ahead of crashes happening before 3 km to go, and to not get involved in the crashes in the last 3 km.
As long as they expect crashes to happen and everyone else to battle for position, they too will muscle their way to the front 13 km, 18 km, 25 km before the finish. The problem is the riders/teams.
...because GC riders are forced to mix it at the front of the peloton with the sprint trains, or risk losing time by getting stuck behind a crash, gaps happening at the finish etc...
Unfortunately who is going to tell them to stop blaming others except themselves UCI president blames Tour de France crashes 'above all' on riders and tension in pelotonThe best thing people can do about this is to stop blaming
- the UCI
- the organizers
- the roundabouts
- the descends
- the sharp bends
- the spectators
- the signs
- the holes in the road
- the branches from trees
- the bottles
- the wind
- um, and did I forget to mention the UCI?
Riders, and teams, don't do themselves any favours by raising these things at the last minute. I'm pretty sure the rules allow them to raise issues with the route before the morning of the race and even if they don't, they can comment and make sure representatives know a long way in advance. The finishes have been known for a long time now. I've not listened to the interview but I think this is what Philipe Gilbert has complained about as a CPA rep.Riders can't take the full responsibility if nobody listens to them. People and organisations that decide for them. Some of you are claiming they don't have any responsibility for their decisions.
That is just whacked.
When was the last time a GC rider lost time in the last 3 km? And how would that have changed if the 3 km-rule wasn't reactive?seems to cover everything and yes, they still don't want to get gapped at the finish for whatever reason.
This isn't really the point is it? The current rules force them to congest the roads at some of the most dangerous parts of a flat stage because they have to be there to benefit from the rule. The idea is to remove them from these parts of the race so that 1) there is more space and 2) crashes that may happen do not have a huge effect on the overall GC classification.When was the last time a GC rider lost time in the last 3 km? And how would that have changed if the 3 km-rule wasn't reactive?