Fix or remove TTT

[byu123]

That is the point of the last line, you moron. If you had actually raced or ridden a bike then you would know that Evans and Menchov had an opportunity to limit their losses by having their team practice time trialing during training camps and by reconning the course. Their pracice sessions should have been done of terrain that approximates the TdF course. Even though their teams are not strong in this discipline, on a technical course careful preparation should have been an immense help.

Manolo Saiz' Liberty Seguros and ONCE teams used to put up very good TTT performances. That was due in LS's case more to a well drilled team that spectacular individual riders. A technical course offers the possibilities for even larger gains from skill than a typical TTT course. SL and Rabo blew an opportunity.

Evans is a moron because he should have been inisisting that the required preparation took place before the Tour. I won't say the same for Menchov, even though he made the mistake, because Menchov has two and half GTs to his name; he is not a total loser.

Other than the childish name calling . . . just agreed with my earlier post.

 

[Snake8]

Surely everyone can understand that is a bad thing as a specator spectical

Not really sure what a specator spectical is but I'll ask my doctor next time I go.

Bro, your last is a good point, thought not necessarily nicely put.

On the other hand your argument that whether or not this is/will be a good race b/c one team "dominates" the TTT is rubbish. Folks, we are at Stage 4!!!! Lighten up. There is surely plenty of drama left for even you hardened souls accustomed to the rigors of the 1936 TdF when men were men and the race had drama unfolding like it would in 1936 when the race was used to sell papers during the boring summer months...oh wait its boring now because of Lance/Astana, sorry forgot.

 

[Padeiro]

Methinks that if Astana had crashed and come in 5th with LA losing 2:15 all this *****ing wouldn't exist. It's an effing race, boys. You go hard or you go home. So is it OK to ***** about mountaintop finishes that disadvantage the sprinter teams? TTing is a part of the sport, as is sprinting and climbing.

 

[BroDeal]

On the other hand your argument that whether or not this is/will be a good race b/c one team "dominates" the TTT is rubbish. Folks, we are at Stage 4!!!! Lighten up. There is surely plenty of drama left for even you hardened souls accustomed to the rigors of the 1936 TdF when men were men and the race had drama unfolding like it would in 1936 when the race was used to sell papers during the boring summer months...oh wait its boring now because of Lance/Astana, sorry forgot.

We'll see if it will be a good race. I have been skeptical of this year's course since it was announced. On the other hand, I thought the Giro course, with its long ITT and decapitated mountain stages, was likely to be crap; and that race turned out to be very good. I am much more leery of the Tour course today.

If the team that had dominated the TTT was Columbia then it woud not matter much to the GC. Heck it might have made things more interesting as we wondered whether the likes of Rogers would melt down in the mountains. Having a team with four potential winners dominate is completely different. Especially since Andy Schleck looks to be the only one who might challenge, and the wimpy mountain stages this year do not look like they give him a lot of opportunities.

Anything can happen, but this does not bode well.

 

[hornet]

The simple solution is to give modest time bonuses to the first, second, and third teams, like twenty, twelve, and eight seconds. You keep the spectacle, which is beautiful, but prevent it from damaging the GC.

Good one. Have any of the major tours actually done this?

 

[patswana]

Ah another Cadel fanboy cries in his beer.

The only rider that I would really like to see do well is myself.

I am not so immature that I need to be a "fan" of any rider or team. Unlike many people here, I don't consider it a personal accomplishment or a personal failure when a rider I like does or does not do well. Neither reflect on me in any way.

I do appreciate good racing, and as stated above, good racing is most closely associated with close competition. This is very unlikely in this Tour now.

I may come from Australia but that doesn't mean I like Cadel. I find him very annoying. Following a rider just because we happened to have been born in the same country is ridiculous. After all, patriotism is the last resort of the scoundrel.

I also would like to see the day when cleaner teams are at the same level as the teams with the expensive Dr Ferrari-style medical programs. This is certainly not the case in 2009.

 

[Hammerhed]

This year's TTT was a highly technical, challenging affair, but perhaps it was a bit too long. Also, it favored highly organized, well prepared teams, ones who studied the course, pre-rode it a number of times, and practiced as a , well, team. Perhaps a shorter TTT would be better in the future so as to prevent big time gaps from occurring. I thought yesterday's stage was really exciting though.

 

[Bagster]

What is pathetic is a guy who does not ride and only watches Armstrong using a bike avatar to--what?--give him more street cred.

Yeah, it must be pathetic that people would like to see a close fought competition that is not decided until late in the race. If you Lance saddle sniffers could actually pull back away from Armstrong's backside maybe you could see the wider implications of whether this will end up being a good race.

I agree, if it wasn't for that bloody Armstrong, Menchov wouldn't have crashed, Cadel wouldn't have totally cocked up their TT and B-Box and the others would have taken a decent line through that damn corner! If Armstrong hadn't of taken such big pulls on the front the time gaps wouldn't have been so big, he just has no compassion towards other riders that guy! He has single handedly ruined this race as a spectacle!

 

[powderpuff]

lol that is about the coolest bike racing i've seen in a while!

It was a great stage spectacle yesterday, even if my rider didn't fair well.

hard race = the best riders win

is not that how racing is supposed to work?

This should read; "most money = best riders" you should win.
Gee everyone raves how great JB is; anyone could get results with the money and talent he has to work with.

 

[Franklin]

Good one. Have any of the major tours actually done this?

It has been done in the TDF many times. And even variations like: 20 secs for #2 unless the gap is smaller, in that case real time, 30 secs for #3 unless the gap is smaller, in that case real time etc. etc. etc.

I would hate to see the TTT go, but it does have a tendency to upstage the GC. A very hard call. I guess I'm a traditionalist, keep the TTT (on a better suited course^^)

 

[mr. tibbs]

Yeah and watching golf sucks because Tiger Woods is too damn good. Watching Jordan dominate also sucked cuz he was too damn good, practiced too hard, and was too good. Give me a friggin break. Ya'll have been infected by political correctness (gee we all need to be winners so no one feels bad). This is real world competition at the highest level, the TDF, not a Kindergarten game of kickball. Waa Waa Waa . . . my favorite guy sucked today and lost time and now its no fun. Why can't they all just hold hands and ride the TTT as one big happy "world team" of 180 riders.

Pathetic.

Oh wait, you're drawing a parallel between the TTT and individual performances. So really, you're a fan of the individual time trial, not the team time trial. I am, too--it's the ultimate race of truth!

But the unfairness of a team time trial is that it doesn't test anything more than a team's pocketbook--and then that team's leader is rewarded. I think cycling's at its best when it's one-on-one, individual contests.

And that's what most of the posters in this thread who are against the TTT are saying. It's not a case of "my fave team/rider got smoked," but rather, "this isn't very sporting, let's reward the captains based on their OWN merit (as in your Tiger Woods/Michael Jordan example)." That's all.

 

[davidg]

Also, it favored highly organized, well prepared teams, ones who studied the course, pre-rode it a number of times, and practiced as a , well, team. Perhaps a shorter TTT would be better in the future so as to prevent big time gaps from occurring.

That sounds like a criticism. Surely the teams that did bother to spend the time and effort should be the ones who are rewarded.

 

[ingsve]

I say remove the TTT. There should be a normal short prologue and then bonus seconds for the sprinters to fight over the yellow jersey on the first 5 or so stages. A TTT ruins that more often than not.

Also it punishes rides for something that is not within their own control, their team not being strong in TTT. Saying that riders should just get a better team is bull****. Do we want 70% of the peloton being time trialers and rolleurs?

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

That sounds like a criticism. Surely the teams that did bother to spend the time and effort should be the ones who are rewarded.

There seems to be a worrying school of thought developing here that the team who prepares the best, and is the most organized etc etc wins the TTT. "Astana knew where the wind would blow, age their tyres in a cellar for 2 years and practiced riding in formation - the other teams didn't bother looking at the course and never practiced riding together" etc etc. Idiocy!

This is typical of the sort of cr*p that gets spouted off by Astana apologists to cover up the fact that they thrashed everyone in the ITT because they have the money to buy guys like Kloden, Leipheimer to ride for Lance and Contador....and instead of having weaker domestiques getting shelled after a few kms (like Garmin) they have guys like Zubeldia who can stay in the train til the end. It's all about ability.

That's not including the obvious implications of different teams having different track records and attitudes towards medical programs.

Wake up guys!

 

[elapid]

I say remove the TTT. There should be a normal short prologue and then bonus seconds for the sprinters to fight over the yellow jersey on the first 5 or so stages. A TTT ruins that more often than not.

Also it punishes rides for something that is not within their own control, their team not being strong in TTT. Saying that riders should just get a better team is bull****. Do we want 70% of the peloton being time trialers and rolleurs?

+1. No TTT. The TTT is unfair for GC contenders, particularly if their team is not so strong for whatever reasons. The race would be much better if Lance, Contador, Evans, Menchov, Sastre and the Schlecks were separated by less than 60-90 seconds rather than some of the blowouts resulting from yesterday's TTT.

 

[pmcg76]

I pointed this out before but I dont want cycling becoming like European football where the best teams are those with the biggest budgets win. I bet if you compared the budgets with how all the teams finished, it would be very reflective of budgets.

TTT is better as an individual event or Olympic event as others have pointed out. It should not be used to decide an individual event, people wont be talking about Astana winning the Tour in 20years, maybe Lance or Alberto so it shouldnt be used in the Tour plus why is it in some Tours but not in others. If there is going to be a TTT, It should be maybe 20-30km on the first day like at the Giro this year.

 

[Snake8]

This should read; "most money = best riders" you should win.
Gee everyone raves how great JB is; anyone could get results with the money and talent he has to work with.

I think Garmin is a low/mid budget team and they did well no?

 

[mr. tibbs]

+1. No TTT. The TTT is unfair for GC contenders, particularly if their team is not so strong for whatever reasons. The race would be much better if Lance, Contador, Evans, Menchov, Sastre and the Schlecks were separated by less than 60-90 seconds rather than some of the blowouts resulting from yesterday's TTT.

I agree, whole-heartedly.

Also, elapid clearly has a gun. Who could argue with that?

EDIT: You're right, Snake, Garmin is the apparent exception--except the TTT is almost their only focus. I enjoy TTTs, I just don't like how they affect the GC.

 

[Publicus]

+1. No TTT. The TTT is unfair for GC contenders, particularly if their team is not so strong for whatever reasons. The race would be much better if Lance, Contador, Evans, Menchov, Sastre and the Schlecks were separated by less than 60-90 seconds rather than some of the blowouts resulting from yesterday's TTT.

I just don't understand "fair" in a sporting context. It's not like Astana violated some rules when they previewed the course a couple of days before the race. Will it be equally unfair that Contador rode Andorra 3 times earlier this year? Or that he and Lance previewed the Alps?

My point is that to be the best isn't just about having more money or better drugs. It also requires training and dedication. Menchov NOT riding the course more than once was just inexcusable. I have no sympathy for him. Each GC candidate knows the weakness of his team and himself. To not address it in the off season to minimize it (while maximize your strengths) is what separates the pretenders from the contenders IMHO.

 

[clydesdale]

I'm a Saxo fan, thought they ran a good TTT yesterday and am generally happy with the result. I have long since conceded the tour to contador, though.

I don't have a problem with the Team Time Trial per se and i'm more than happy with Schleck only being 120 and 140 down after the 2/3 of the time trial sections. My problem is that if you include a technical team time trial that will have large time gaps, I think you owe it to the other GC contender mountain specialists to have a few brutal mountain stages to make up time. I just don't think there is that this year.

Therefore to sum up: If you include a long technical time trial, load up on mountain stages (preferable hard ones) to even things up.

 

[Publicus]

I'm a Saxo fan, thought they ran a good TTT yesterday and am generally happy with the result. I have long since conceded the tour to contador, though.

I don't have a problem with the Team Time Trial per se and i'm more than happy with Schleck only being 120 and 140 down after the 2/3 of the time trial sections. My problem is that if you include a technical team time trial that will have large time gaps, I think you owe it to the other GC contender mountain specialists to have a few brutal mountain stages to make up time. I just don't think there is that this year.

Therefore to sum up: If you include a long technical time trial, load up on mountain stages (preferable hard ones) to even things up.

More balance in the overall course. Now that's a fair point. That being said, there may not be a ton of mountain top finishes, but there will be some absolutely brutal climbing the last week of the Tour.

 

[Cobber]

5. Get rid of the TTT. The strong teams already have a huge advantage. The TTT makes team strength too much of a factor and can all but eliminate good GC riders on weaker teams. I'd much rather see the best rider win the TdF than the 2nd or 3rd best rider on the strongest team win.

.... and yes, I am supporting one of the GC riders that lost a lot of time yesterday....

 

[mr. tibbs]

5. Get rid of the TTT. The strong teams already have a huge advantage. The TTT makes team strength too much of a factor and can all but eliminate good GC riders on weaker teams. I'd much rather see the best rider win the TdF than the 2nd or 3rd best rider on the strongest team win.

.... and yes, I am supporting one of the GC riders that lost a lot of time yesterday....

Which is irrelevant to whether or not the TTT should be done away with. I agree with Cobber, and my pick for overall (as well as my fave cyclist) did very well yesterday.

So don't jump all over Cobber b/c his favorite didn't fare well--even people whose preferences benefited from the TTT can recognize that it has a negative impact on the race.

 

[elapid]

I just don't understand "fair" in a sporting context. It's not like Astana violated some rules when they previewed the course a couple of days before the race. Will it be equally unfair that Contador rode Andorra 3 times earlier this year? Or that he and Lance previewed the Alps?

My point is that to be the best isn't just about having more money or better drugs. It also requires training and dedication. Menchov NOT riding the course more than once was just inexcusable. I have no sympathy for him. Each GC candidate knows the weakness of his team and himself. To not address it in the off season to minimize it (while maximize your strengths) is what separates the pretenders from the contenders IMHO.

Unfair may be the incorrect word because I am not saying that there is any wrongdoing by any individual or team. Teams are obviously integral to a GC contender's success, from protecting them on the flats, controlling breaks, and setting them up in the mountains. But the TTT is taking the team role too far IMO. The aim for a GC contender is obviously to win the GT, and it would be nice to see the GC contenders go head-to-head to decide the winner, whether it be ITT and/or the mountains. I think it is unfortunate that this may not happen this year because the best team, rather than potentially the best individual, won the TTT and gained such large time gaps to make it very difficult for some of true GC contenders to contend the overall win.

 

[Jayarbie]

The whining is ridiculous. Only two "contenders" lost siginificant time so as to make their chances very small - Menchov and Evans. The rest of the contenders are still very much in the race. Does anyone think Sastre can't make up 2 1/2 minutes in the mountains? Did anyone actually watch last year's race? The TTT is one of the obstacles in a GT, and riders need to deal with it. A couple years ago, Iban Mayo lost several minutes on the pave section. Was that unfair? Alex Zulle lost several minutes in a crash on a flat stage in 1999. Was that unfair? Should the organizers neutralize flat stages so contenders don't "unfairly" lose time? All of this whining about the TTT is very silly. Yes, it gave Contador an advantage over the other contenders. That's what it is designed to do - give the advantage to the riders on the team that wins it.

And it's not about the budget, it's about the riders. The Astana riders won the stage, not the Astana bankroll. While it's true that a big budget generally allows teams to hire the better riders, that is an advantage on EVERY stage, not just the TTT.