Feeding and bottles on final climbs

[auscyclefan94]

With the controversey and time penalties during this vuelta for bottles and feeding, should the rule be changed to allow such happening as a rider in a lead group would have to go backwards to get one and would cost them time. Does it really matter if they take a bottle or a feed on? Please express thoughts...

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

I kinda like it the way it is. Means rider's have to dig more deep.

 

[Bala Verde]

What is the 'official' reasoning behind the rule?

Is it that cyclists need to dose their efforts and remember to eat (ie bonking is part of the game). Is it 'cheating' starting a climb without bottles ie being lighter, and then get two half way? Is it to promote suffering? Is it due to logistics/safety, ie to prevent DS cars to follow their individual rider up the last climb? Related fairness, if UCI can't guarantee that every rider has access to food/drinks, no one has access? etc..

Otherwise there is little to discuss...


From the official UCI Road Race Regulations handbook

FEEDING:
2.3.025 In events or stages over a distance not exceeding 150 km, it is recommended that riders be supplied with refreshments only from the team car. The refreshments may be provided either in bonkbags or flasks. Riders shall move slowly up level with their team manager's car and he shall supply them from the vehicle. Food and drink shall be provided exclusively behind the commissaire's car and in no case in or behind the bunch. If a group of 15 riders or less has broken away from the bunch, food and drink may be supplied at the rear of that group.
(text modified on 1.01.05).

2.3.026 In other events or stages the organisers may also provide food and drink in areas set aside for that purpose. The feeding zones will be signposted. They shall be of sufficient length to allow supply operations to proceed smoothly. The food and drink shall be distributed on foot by the staff accompanying the team and by no-one else. They shall be positioned on one side of the road only, which must be the side on which road traffic circulates in the country concerned.
(text modified on 1.01.05).

2.3.027 Feeding is prohibited on climbs, descents and during the first 50 and last 20 km. The commissaires panel may reduce the distance of 50 kilometres mentioned above, depending on atmospheric conditions and the category, type and length of the race. Such a decision must be communicated to interested parties before the start of the race.
(text modified on 1.01.01).

2.3.028 During world championships and Olympic Games, feeding is only permitted at the permanent pit(s) set up for that purpose along the course and from the time set by the UCI for each course individually.
(text modified on 1.01.00).

 

[Big_Blue_Dave]

What is the 'official' reasoning behind the rule?

Is it that cyclists need to dose their efforts and remember to eat (ie bonking is part of the game). Is it 'cheating' starting a climb without bottles ie being lighter, and then get two half way? Is it to promote suffering? Is it due to logistics/safety, ie to prevent DS cars to follow their individual rider up the last climb? Related fairness, if UCI can't guarantee that every rider has access to food/drinks, no one has access? etc..

Otherwise there is little to discuss...


From the official UCI Road Race Regulations handbook

Reading this, then the 20km rule which is sometimes reduced or cancelled on very hot stages of some races is being flouted regularly. I think there should be drinks handed out but set up like in a marathon at particular points run by race organisers to hand out, on mountain climbs only, as it would reduce the amount of "sticky" bottle grabbing and could make it easier for the riders to grab the bottles.

 

[ingsve]

What is the 'official' reasoning behind the rule?

Don't know about the official reason but my guess would be various fairness reasons. As you mentioned the logistics can be very tricky to pull off in the final 20k which could lead to some riders having an advantage over others.

Another reason I could imagine is that if you allow feeding from car in the last 20k or in the last climb then a rider could take advantage of that fact and pull back to the team car to prevent other riders from attacking during a crucial point of the race simply because it would be unsportsmanlike to attack at that point.

 

[Master50]

multiple reasons

But mostly to keep the team cars from helping. For most of we mere mortals the car race behind the peloton is not a factor, Except at pro races there are only neutral support and the commissaire following. At the ultimate moments the rules try to ensure that the mangers are not assisting the riders. A well time water bottle can save a rider from popping off on a climb. Then there is the added chaos of team cars trying to get to a rider 5 km from the finish. Time is a factor too. Even on a climb the last 20 Km is close enough to the finish that a rider can carry all the water he should need for that last 20 km. In a big pro race there are as many as 8 officials but smaller races often have only 1 or 2 to monitor the riders and anyone that has raced with pros knows how well they can cheat.

This rule used to much harsher too and at one time a bottle in the last 20 km earned a DQ. The rule changed after Duclos Lasalle won Paris Roubaix. If you have seen the race you know how hard it must be to get a team car up to the front. DL had bee riding for well over an hour without a bottle. His team car arrived at the front within the last 20 Km. The chief Official specifically instructed the managers they could give their riders at the front a bottle having recognized the need and the amount of time these riders were without water. DL won the race after taking that bottle and another rider refused knowing the rule. We all know that DL won the race and the following protests from the other riders team was denied. The UCI took a beating from this team but the Commissaire decision was upheld. That Commissaire was put in the refrigerator for a year for his decision and the rule was changed to it's current wording. That official was one of the UCI's most experienced officials and he was a Commissaire trainer until his untimely death at a Speed skating event where his car went through the ice.
Some officials have compassion even at the possible effect to their careers.
The current fine is 2000 swiss Francs. During the last 20 km. there is more than enough going on that allowing team cars to feed in that last 20 km would be inviting cheating and probably add more danger to the riders. Most bikes can carry 2 bottles and even on a hot day that should be enough water to cover the last 20 km. on just about any race course.

 

[quiensabe]

Food and drink

No rider can be given food or drinks within the last 10 kms. On a flat stage the speed often approaches 60 kph at this point. Obviously, cars handing out bidons would be dangerous. On a climb, the roads are often narrow at the top; so no space for cars to shuttle back & forth handing out bottles & getting in everone's way. It's a common-sense rule. If this debate is because of Mosquera's 20-seconds' time penalty; he was penalised because he took a bottle from a spectator. He knows the rule; and it was a stupid thing to do anyway. You never know what might be in the bottle!

 

[BroDeal]

I have no problem with food not being available except at feed zones. Jerseys do have pockets. Water should always be available. I don't think contenders on weak teams should be penalized for not having a teammate to fetch liquid.

There are already motorcycles following the lead groups. They should all have racks of bottles. Of course some of this would not be much of a problem if riders were not as keen to toss their bottles at the beginning of the slightest incline...

 

[Anonymous]

I kinda like it the way it is. Means rider's have to dig more deep.

..ly into their "suitcase of courage."...

 

[egtalbot]

I'm with BroDeal on this one. No reason not to make water available from a neutral car anytime it is feasible.

But yeah, the tossing bottles at the start of a climb seems silly. I suppose one could calculate how much the extra weight of a bottle might cost in terms of watts required to carry it up the hill,and make the argument in favor of it. But the difference has got to be far less than the impact (which might carry over until the next day) of getting just a little too dehydrated.

 

[Race Radio]

Evens was not penalized for just received a bottle. He received a "Turbo Bottle" right in front of the official car. It was much more then just getting a bottle, the team car came up, Honked its horn to get the other cars out of the way, then dragged Evens up the climb with a Turbo Bottle. The only reason he stopped is because the Official blew a whistle on him.

Evens whines but he knows they could have gone much worse on him.

 

[pedaling squares]

Like Race Radio pointed out, that was no ordinary bottle. It was one of the stickier bottles I have seen in a long time. I don't mind the current rule, it's only 20 km and the bikes can hold two bottles. Car support would be a nightmare on the climbs and dangerous on the descents. Soigneur support... well it could be difficult to collect them from the feed zones and drop them off in the last 20 km. More bloody cars zipping past the riders. Moto support... that idea has merit but surely riders would be hanging on to sticky bottles or riding in the slipstream under the guise of grabbing a bottle.

What I didn't like was the penalty being applied when the rider grabbed a new bike from the team car. The man needed a bottle. But this can't be the first time that has happened, maybe SL should have used a little foresight. Apart from that incident, they seem to use perfect team tactics!

 

[auscyclefan94]

Like Race Radio pointed out, that was no ordinary bottle. It was one of the stickier bottles I have seen in a long time. I don't mind the current rule, it's only 20 km and the bikes can hold two bottles. Car support would be a nightmare on the climbs and dangerous on the descents. Soigneur support... well it could be difficult to collect them from the feed zones and drop them off in the last 20 km. More bloody cars zipping past the riders. Moto support... that idea has merit but surely riders would be hanging on to sticky bottles or riding in the slipstream under the guise of grabbing a bottle.

What I didn't like was the penalty being applied when the rider grabbed a new bike from the team car. The man needed a bottle. But this can't be the first time that has happened, maybe SL should have used a little foresight. Apart from that incident, they seem to use perfect team tactics!

20km of climbing doesn't sound like much but when their is still an hour of racing left it looks a little bit more substantial

 

[Race Radio]

20km of climbing doesn't sound like much but when their is still an hour of racing left it looks a little bit more substantial

Evens had 15km and 40 minutes left when he got his power bottle.

That Evens did not have the piece of mind to bring his bottle (He only had one when he flatted) with him when he switched bikes should tell you something. If it was important he would have grabbed it. It is common for a rider to do this.

The issue is that he hung on to the bottle and was dragged up the climb. This was done right in front of a commissar. He got off easy.

 

[ScottinPhilly]

It seems to me like any change to the rule,could pose risks. I think that maybe the idea that was suggested of using a marathon run style drinks station set up somehwere along the climb by race officials and organizers might have the most potential.This would give riders themselves the choice to take on water or not and also takes out the element of the cars, team or neutral, and motobikes out of the equation. It also could solve the fairness question of what is a strong rider on a weak team, i.e. Evans, is to do if his teammates can't handle the chore.

 

[Race Radio]

It seems to me like any change to the rule,could pose risks. I think that maybe the idea that was suggested of using a marathon run style drinks station set up somehwere along the climb by race officials and organizers might have the most potential.This would give riders themselves the choice to take on water or not and also takes out the element of the cars, team or neutral, and motobikes out of the equation. It also could solve the fairness question of what is a strong rider on a weak team, i.e. Evans, is to do if his teammates can't handle the chore.

I agree. The Giro has a Moto that has two boxes on the back that they fill with bottles. The riders can grab them when they like . If the last 20km is a climb have one of the commissar bikes have a box of bottles in the back

 

[Rupert]

Spectators

No rider can be given food or drinks within the last 10 kms. On a flat stage the speed often approaches 60 kph at this point. Obviously, cars handing out bidons would be dangerous. On a climb, the roads are often narrow at the top; so no space for cars to shuttle back & forth handing out bottles & getting in everone's way. It's a common-sense rule. If this debate is because of Mosquera's 20-seconds' time penalty; he was penalised because he took a bottle from a spectator. He knows the rule; and it was a stupid thing to do anyway. You never know what might be in the bottle!

Agree on the safety issue. If they can make water available to everyone evenly (on climbs) without having team cars getting in the mix of riders that would be great.
I thought it was quite common for riders to take bottles from spectators, but NEVER to drink them, just use them for cooling... Never occurred to me that "no feed" rules would apply to that.

My guess is that the thread is more because of Cadel Evans' penalty. Seems to me common sense should apply and that in Evans' circumstance they could have waived the penalty. Just as they've waived "no feed" rules at otehr times when it made sense, for health or safety reasons. This one was "adding insult to injury."

 

[Rupert]

Sticky Bottle

Evens was not penalized for just received a bottle. He received a "Turbo Bottle" right in front of the official car.

Sorry - didn't see the "sticky bottle" part of the discussion...

 

[auscyclefan94]

Evens had 15km and 40 minutes left when he got his power bottle.

That Evens did not have the piece of mind to bring his bottle (He only had one when he flatted) with him when he switched bikes should tell you something. If it was important he would have grabbed it. It is common for a rider to do this.

The issue is that he hung on to the bottle and was dragged up the climb. This was done right in front of a commissar. He got off easy.

It was an hour. The Sierra nevada was 16km to go plus 1km left of the monachil. They would of been doing 18km/h to 20km/h which results as 50mins - 1hr

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It was an hour. The Sierra nevada was 16km to go plus 1km left of the monachil. They would of been doing 18km/h to 20km/h which results as 50mins - 1hr

I had a check on Universal to review the full story.

From when Evans is given his new bike until he finishes the stage was 42mins 5 sec.

Unfortunately for Evans he didn't just receive a new bottle but he got a pull and hand-sling too - right under the Comms nose!

Actually I also had a look to see when he punctured - I started timing him at the point he suddenly starts looking down at his wheel and started swaying from side to side - he started riding slowly and didn't come for a complete stop for 33 seconds - from this point until his team car arrives and very quickly gives him a new bike (six secs)is a further 57 seconds.

So from the point he realizes he punctures to getting the new bike is 1m 30s!!

 

[auscyclefan94]

I had a check on Universal to review the full story.

From when Evans is given his new bike until he finishes the stage was 42mins 5 sec.

Unfortunately for Evans he didn't just receive a new bottle but he got a pull and hand-sling too - right under the Comms nose!

Actually I also had a look to see when he punctured - I started timing him at the point he suddenly starts looking down at his wheel and started swaying from side to side - he started riding slowly and didn't come for a complete stop for 33 seconds - from this point until his team car arrives and very quickly gives him a new bike (six secs)is a further 57 seconds.

So from the point he realizes he punctures to getting the new bike is 1m 30s!!

excellent point you make. you would have to count the time he was slowing down as well. his deficit to valv-piti was 1:32. He also said that his power outtage on the climbs proved he was the strongest there though being the strongest means jack all in any race.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

excellent point you make. you would have to count the time he was slowing down as well. his deficit to valv-piti was 1:32. He also said that his power outtage on the climbs proved he was the strongest there though being the strongest means jack all in any race.

Well for me I thought he made a big error in his delay in getting off the bike for the wheelchange. The neutral service was right behind when he looked down at his back wheel - he should have stopped immediatley.

While he lost a lot of time with the puncture at the end of the stage he finished 1m 08s behind Valverde so he had managed to claw back some time on the climb. To me that suggests that he would have stuck with the Valverde group.

Vv got an 8 second bonus for 3rd - which I dont think Evans would have got.
Cadel finished 1:32 behind Vv - take off the 10sec penalty and its 1:22 and the 1:08 he lost on the stage because of the puncture - so he would have still been second at 14 seconds!

 

[auscyclefan94]

Well for me I thought he made a big error in his delay in getting off the bike for the wheelchange. The neutral service was right behind when he looked down at his back wheel - he should have stopped immediatley.

While he lost a lot of time with the puncture at the end of the stage he finished 1m 08s behind Valverde so he had managed to claw back some time on the climb. To me that suggests that he would have stuck with the Valverde group.

Vv got an 8 second bonus for 3rd - which I dont think Evans would have got.
Cadel finished 1:32 behind Vv - take off the 10sec penalty and its 1:22 and the 1:08 he lost on the stage because of the puncture - so he would have still been second at 14 seconds!

Agreed but there is a lot of hypotheticals in both arguements. but you do wonder what could of been.

 

[Race Radio]

It was an hour. The Sierra nevada was 16km to go plus 1km left of the monachil. They would of been doing 18km/h to 20km/h which results as 50mins - 1hr

You can watch the re-run on Universal sports anytime you want. I did, my numbers are exact, not guesses.

 

[350Watts]

I'm with BroDeal on this one. No reason not to make water available from a neutral car anytime it is feasible.

But yeah, the tossing bottles at the start of a climb seems silly. I suppose one could calculate how much the extra weight of a bottle might cost in terms of watts required to carry it up the hill,and make the argument in favor of it. But the difference has got to be far less than the impact (which might carry over until the next day) of getting just a little too dehydrated.

The practice of tossing a water bottle at the start of a climb is so stupid, especially when amateurs do it, 1 bottle is approx. 2 watts.