Sure, but I was referring to the move "looking back for your teammate". And this move is more common when there is a sprint stage and it is more dangerous when there is a full peloton.But it wasn't a (totally) flat stage.
Sure, but I was referring to the move "looking back for your teammate". And this move is more common when there is a sprint stage and it is more dangerous when there is a full peloton.But it wasn't a (totally) flat stage.
So in your opinion, sprint stages should no longer exist?Sure, but I was referring to the move "looking back for your teammate". And this move is more common when there is a sprint stage and it is more dangerous when there is a full peloton.
Totally agree. What a dumb first stage. A recipe for disaster to be honest.Yeah, but stage 1 of the 2025 Tour being a full blown bunch sprint stage has me worried a bit.
Pretty much. Every stage should be selective enough so that a full peloton does not arrive at the end. For sprint lovers maybe one day races such as Scheldeprijs and De Panne can stay and , of course, there is track cycling for those people as well. In general, I have no reason to watch riders with a physique such as Groenewegen or Cavendish.So in your opinion, sprint stages should no longer exist?
Groenewegen and Cavendish were both bunch sprinters but they have very different physiques.Pretty much. Every stage should be selective enough so that a full peloton does not arrive at the end. For sprint lovers maybe one day races such as Scheldeprijs and De Panne can stay and , of course, there is track cycling for those people as well. In general, I have no reason to watch riders with a physique such as Groenewegen or Cavendish.
Not to be nit-picky but how did you add to the conversation with your post. Yes, neither Cav's nor Dylan's rider type is appealing to me.Groenewegen and Cavendish were both bunch sprinters but they have very different physiques.
I was just making the point that they are very different despite both having the same specialist skills.Not to be nit-picky but how did you add to the conversation with your post. Yes, neither Cav's nor Dylan's rider type is appealing to me.
Pretty much. Every stage should be selective enough so that a full peloton does not arrive at the end. For sprint lovers maybe one day races such as Scheldeprijs and De Panne can stay and , of course, there is track cycling for those people as well. In general, I have no reason to watch riders with a physique such as Groenewegen or Cavendish.
removed by jmdirtPretty much. Every stage should be selective enough so that a full peloton does not arrive at the end. For sprint lovers maybe one day races such as Scheldeprijs and De Panne can stay and , of course, there is track cycling for those people as well. In general, I have no reason to watch riders with a physique such as Groenewegen or Cavendish.
Please provide data for both of these.Sure, a lot of crashes happen with no contact. Some happen when equipment malfunctions (seemingly with ever increasing frequency recently because of the ridiculous hookless tubeless...). Some happen because of a rider's fault (seemingly with ever increasing frequency because of the unnecessary disk brakes). All of these issues need to be addresses.
Sprinters cause crashes. There is nothing off topic there.Mod please move this post to the off topic section...
I'm sorry that you wouldn't take the time to educate yourself on hookless rims/tires. Its not "dangerous technology". Granted, in cycling there is some poor engineering and manufacturing that can make for dangerous situations, but that has improved over the last several years. Poor application is also a factor that can make for a bad situation, but that is on the user/mechanic, not the rim/tire.Sprinters cause crashes. There is nothing off topic there.
It is true that I do not like sprint stages and I believe that type of rider should just become obsolete or they should race on the track. You can have your own opinions but if you cannot surmise that there are much fewer crashes on MTF vs sprint stages I cannot help you further.
Hookles is a dangerous technology at the moment, but you can believe what you want.
I do not see you presenting any data either. I do not have the numbers nor the inclination to compile a report. However, I believe the hookless/tubeless combo is a very dangerous one and there have been 2 or 3 very prominent crashes caused by this combo. Luckily they did not lead to major catastrophes for a big number of riders but the way those crashes happened is worrying in my opinion.I'm sorry that you wouldn't take the time to educate yourself on hookless rims/tires. Its not "dangerous technology". Granted, in cycling there is some poor engineering and manufacturing that can make for dangerous situations, but that has improved over the last several years. Poor application is also a factor that can make for a bad situation, but that is on the user/mechanic, not the rim/tire.
I 'believe what I want' because I read the research, and follow manufacturer guidelines instead of relying on hyperbole from "X" for information.
I'm still waiting for your supporting data...
You made false statements without support, I didn't.I do not see you presenting any data either. I do not have the numbers nor the inclination to compile a report. However, I believe the hookless/tubeless combo is a very dangerous one and there have been 2 or 3 very prominent crashes caused by this combo. Luckily they did not lead to major catastrophes for a big number of riders but the way those crashes happened is worrying in my opinion.
FYI, the reason why manufacturers even went hookless is because of ease of production and that alone. Not because of some riding benefits.
Now, how did you educate yourself on this topic? By reading manufacturer's advertisement, by listening to anecdotal evidence or by doing actual tests?
What false statements? That hookless rims for cycling is a dangerous technology? I do not consider it to be a false statement.You made false statements without support, I didn't.
Two or three crashes several years ago (edit: using the wrong tires) is an issue?
Tubulars roll off, so are/were they dangerous?
Manufacturers number one priority is $elling so that wouldn't be a good place to start normally, but since I was unable to quickly locate the data (I assume its behind a paywall now), I shared the ENVE link because they clearly pulled from that data (while also adding their info). Bike Radar has published several articles about this topic. I was able to test several sets of demo wheels, on several different occasions. I recognize that until 2017ish road cycling was the only wheeled game that still used hooks (mountain bikes, motocycles, automobiles, ATV/UTV...all no hook).
Tying my last sentence to your claim that 'the only reason manufacturers went to hookless is ease of production and that alone' doesn't fit does it. Certainly its easier to mold a carbon rim without a hook, but are you claiming that all wheels are hookless because of ease of manufacturing? Metal motorcycle/car rims could have hooks without adding complexity to manufacturing, but they don't. Doesn't that make you wonder if the hook is really an import part?
Of note, DT still manufactures rims with a hook, but readily admits that its in part to cover their backside from liability claims.
However, I believe the hookless/tubeless combo is a very dangerous one and there have been 2 or 3 very prominent crashes caused by this combo.
Off the top of my head Thomas De Ghent and Pog in the Giro. There was some sprint where a riders's tire just blew off.What were those prominent crashes?
I'm sure the crashes were prominent, just not the fact that the hookless/tubeless combo was involved.
Off the top of my head Thomas De Ghent and Pog in the Giro.
We all agree that the Basque cash was a couple of levels worse than either TdG or Pog's crash. However, the latter's crashes were cause by rim/tire failure alone and that is what bothers me. The Basque crash is a different story. Mostly rider aggressiveness combined with bad road conditions imho.I think we might have different definitions of "prominent crash".
For me, a prominent crash is if the rider(s) involved is/are seriously hurt, not if it's merely a prominent rider being involved. And then of course there are cases like the Basque Crash last year. Or the Dwars crash a few days before that.
I hope you'll forgive me for forgetting that Pogacar had crashed in the Giro, considering he still won by almost 10 minutes, so it clearly didn't slow him down all that much.
May I conclude that you implicitly agree with my points regarding hooksless by not debating it further?