• 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!

explain stage 16 on giro

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

wannabecyclist

Dec 19, 2013
23
0
0
Visit site
new to sport- explain stage 16 on giro please

I'm new to the sport and I watched the whole Giro ... but I did not understand what happened on stage 16. Why the controversy? Did Hesjedal and Quintana do something wrong?
 
Afrank

Afrank

Aug 16, 2011
10,819
2
0
Visit site
There was a rumor going around the peloton that the descent of Stelvio would be neutralized, but communication to teams was bad and some heard it and others didn't. As a result of some teams thinking it was neutralized they didn't race it, some even came to a stop at the top to put on jackets. Quintana along with others attacked on the descent, or carried on through it and then started pushing the pace when they saw they had a gap may be more accurate (the motos and race officials didn't make any moves to tell them that they weren't aloud to attack either). Thinking the descent was neutralized, Uran and others made no move to chase him down. And as a result he had 2 minutes by the time the descent ended.

Some feel it was unfair to take advantage of the confusion to gain time, it's a complex issue though. Some other factors in opposition to the idea that it was unfair what Quintana did, could the riders see the red flag? A red flag doesn't mean anything in cycling, why did Uran (or others) not just chase after anyway? Communication to the riders by RCS was bad and not everyone even heard the message that was sent out, RCS's official statement after the incident was that only the first 6 turns of the descent were neutralized.

Here's a couple other threads where you can read some of the debates that have been had on this.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=22366
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=22349
 
cineteq

cineteq

May 20, 2009
8,934
7
17,495
Visit site
Afrank said:
There was a rumor going around the peloton that the descent of Stelvio would be neutralized, but communication to teams was bad and some heard it and others didn't. As a result of some teams thinking it was neutralized they didn't race it, some even came to a stop at the top to put on jackets. Quintana along with others attacked on the descent, or carried on through it and then started pushing the pace when they saw they had a gap may be more accurate (the motos and race officials didn't make any moves to tell them that they weren't aloud to attack either). Thinking the descent was neutralized, Uran and others made no move to chase him down. And as a result he had 2 minutes by the time the descent ended.

Some feel it was unfair to take advantage of the confusion to gain time, it's a complex issue though. Some other factors in opposition to the idea that it was unfair what Quintana did, could the riders see the red flag? A red flag doesn't mean anything in cycling, why did Uran (or others) not just chase after anyway? Communication to the riders by RCS was bad and not everyone even heard the message that was sent out, RCS's official statement after the incident was that only the first 6 turns of the descent were neutralized.

Here's a couple other threads where you can read some of the debates that have been had on this.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=22366
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=22349
Click to expand...
Excelent explanation! Still think UCI should have adjusted time gaps by 1:30.
 
J

JayKosta

Nov 25, 2010
1,154
56
10,580
Visit site
My understanding is that 'neutralizing' means that everyone's individual (or a large group of riders) 'time gap' at a certain point is noted, and then they are restarted with the same time gaps at a later point. This would be done for major safety concerns, or major problems on the course.

Also at the start of some races the beginning section is neutralized meaning that everyone rides in a large group at a reduced speed. This is done for safety to get the group out from crowded streets.

What seems to have happened on stage 16 was that instead of a true 'neutralizing' the officials told the riders to NOT PASS the race motorcycles that had red flags. The motorcycles were supposed to keep the downhill speed at a safe level. But it seems that some riders thought that real 'neutralizing' had been declared, and also some motorcycles apparently went faster than others. As a result, the leaders kept going fast, and many others slowed down.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA
 
U

UlleGigo

May 23, 2010
516
0
0
Visit site
We're not starting this again. The UCI can not adjust times arbitrarily. It would make a mockery of the race and the organisers.

Why 1min30sec? Why not 55sec? Why not place Quintana et al at the back of the group? Why not disqualify Quintana and co completely? Why not penalise Quintana and co 20min like Kišerlovski wanted?

You see no matter what the penalty people are going to complain that it is unfair one way or another.

For me you have to decide one thing. Did Quintana cheat? If yes then you do what you do in a sprint you place him at the back of the main group. Meaning he is penalised every second he gained. If no then you leave it as it is. To me those are the only two options. For me Quintana did not cheat so nothing is changed.

Overall the question remaining now is, did the 55sec that Quintana gained on the descent change the overall result of the race? The answer to that is no. And that is the answer that you want as long as, like me, you agree that Quintana did not cheat.
 
cineteq

cineteq

May 20, 2009
8,934
7
17,495
Visit site
UlleGigo said:
Overall the question remaining now is, did the 55sec that Quintana gained on the descent change the overall result of the race? The answer to that is no. And that is the answer that you want as long as, like me, you agree that Quintana did not cheat.
Click to expand...
Glad that he showed he was the stronger climber, but that wasn't the point. What if Quintana would've lost time and got weaker after that stage?
 
He-manuelle Sella

He-manuelle Sella

Jul 31, 2010
38
0
0
Visit site
wannabecyclist said:
I'm new to the sport and I watched the whole Giro ... but I did not understand what happened on stage 16. Why the controversy? Did Hesjedal and Quintana do something wrong?
Click to expand...

No please No! Let's not do this all again! Aaaaarggggghhhhh!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom